cornwall and the isles of scilly strategic economic … economic...cornwall and the isles of scilly...

March 2014

CORNWALL AND THE ISLES OF SCILLY

STRATEGIC ECONOMIC PLAN

Cornwall Council

Cornwall Bus Network

FINAL

Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly Strategic Economic Plan

Cornwall Bus Network Scheme Summary

Prepared for Cornwall Council

Carrick House Pydar Street

TR1 1EB

Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff

11 High Cross Truro

TR1 2AJ

01872 245 860 www.pbworld.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary of Problem The bus network in Cornwall is in a period of instability caused by significant changes in the level of funding for subsidies and investment which has caused reductions in fare paying passengers. Many vehicles have been cascaded to Cornwall from other operating areas and the quality needs to be improved. With rising motoring costs, Cornwall needs to ensure that its public has a viable alternative to the private car. More people need to be encouraged onto buses to reduce congestion and in the long term, reduce the subsidy required in the network, allowing a quality sustainable network to be developed. Travelling by bus in Cornwall should no longer be a ’choice’ of last resort. Significant changes to the way the bus network in Cornwall is delivered are required in order to ensure a long term sustainable future for the network and allow it to be able to facilitate and respond to Cornwall’s predicted growth. The new Cornwall Bus Network must be fit to support predicted levels of growth in Cornwall and attractive enough to encourage modal switch from the car. Scheme Description Cornwall is making buses the catalyst for local investment and economic growth in its towns. A core network of inter urban bus services between the key commercial centres is required to link businesses together and people to jobs. With targeted investment, the network will become more viable, allowing the subsidy to be redirected to support services that will increase access to jobs, education and services for rural areas, reducing social isolation. The scheme will include.

Purchase of new buses to run the network

Inclusion of innovative bus technologies to improve information and payment systems

New roadside infrastructure This would establish a high quality core network, with the aim of improving quality, providing greater

information and reliability whilst making services more attractive to new and existing customers

CO2

Key Scheme Information Table Report reference

Scheme Name Cornwall Bus Network -

Description A core network of inter-urban bus services between the key commercial centres if required to link businesses together and people to jobs. The scheme will include the purchase of new buses to run the network, innovative bus technologies to improve information and payment and new roadside infrastructure.

Section 11

Reason for intervention

The project aims to deliver a step change in the quality of bus services within Cornwall by providing new vehicles and improved infrastructure, creating and supporting a high quality, sustainable bus network between the key towns within Cornwall.

Section 11

Scheme Promoter

Matthew Sidney, Transport Planning and Strategy Manager, Cornwall Council -

Scheme cost £10.275m Section 3.1

Funding sources

SEP £8.0m

Section 3.2

SIF -

Grant -

LTP £2.275m

S106 -

Developer -

CIL -

BCR 11.5 GVA £32.4m Section 3.3

Dwellings unlocked

280 Jobs unlocked

909 Section 3.3

VfM category Good Section 3.4

Key Delivery Risks and Mitigation

1 Full risk management strategy to be developed as part of scheme development

Section 4.3

Key Dates

Stage 0 Pre-Project Feasibility May – December 2014

Stage 1 Preliminary Design January – May 2015

Stage 2 Planning and Orders and Land assembly

June – October 2015

Stage 3 Detailed design November 2015 – February 2016

Stage 4 Procurement Vehicles & Infrastructure: March –

April 2016 Services: June – August 2016

Stage 5

Construction Infrastructure: June - December 2016 Submission of service changes to Traffic Commissioner: January – March 2017

Section 4.64.6

Stage 6 Project Closure Services: April 2017

Stage 7 Review and Monitoring 2018-2019

KEY FACTS –Cornwall Bus Network

GROWTH PLAN

Scheme will increase the quality of key inter-urban services

Cornwall Council to purchase buses to run the network

Buses loaned to operators, reducing the cost of each service by removing the lease cost of the bus

New vehicles would significantly improve the quality and attractiveness of the services, thereby increasing the number of fare paying passengers and making services more sustainable

Project includes provision of Real Time Passenger Information and improved infrastructure

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Scheme cost £10.4m

£7.5m on new, modern vehicles

£2.5m on roadside infrastructure

BCR – 11.5

Large Beneficial Impact to transport benefits and reliability as well as regeneration and wider economic effect.

No consents required, fully deliverable under statutory powers

Existing framework contracts in place to

help deliver projects

DELIVERY PLAN Start of design – November 2015

Completion of design – February 2016

Start of works – June 2016

Completion of works – Mar 2017


SEP Scheme Summary - Cornwall Bus Network 140330.doc Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff March 2014 for Cornwall Council - 6 -

CONTENTS Page

1 Package Description 8

1.1 Introduction 8

2 Growth plan 9

2.1 Vision for the local area 9

2.2 Strategic Objectives 9

2.3 Area Opportunities for Growth 10

2.4 Area Barriers to Growth 13

2.5 Evidence 15

2.6 Alternative Solutions 25

2.7 Potential to Reduce Costs 26

2.8 Fallback Situation 26

3 Implementation Plan 27

3.1 Costs Estimate 27

3.2 Funding Profile 27

3.3 Economic Appraisal 28

3.4 Value for Money 28

3.5 Pooling of economic spend across Local Enterprise Partnership area 29

3.6 Assessment of deliverability 29

3.7 Impact of Scheme on Statutory Environmental Constraints 30

3.8 Statutory Powers and Consents 30

3.9 Land Acquisition 30

3.10 Risk Allowance 30

3.11 Monitoring and Evaluation 31

3.12 Wider Tasks 32

4 Delivery Plan 34

4.1 Governance 34

4.2 Stakeholder Management 35

4.3 Risk Allocation and Transfer 36

4.4 Preferred Procurement Route 36

4.5 Partnership Bodies 36

4.6 Delivery, timeline and clear milestones 37



APPENDICES

Appendix A CIL Calculations

Appendix B CAT Output and Appraisal Summary Table

Appendix C Evidence of Delivery

Appendix D Project Governance



1 PACKAGE DESCRIPTION

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 Cornwall is making buses the catalyst for local investment and economic growth in its towns. A core network of inter-urban bus services between the key commercial centres is required to link businesses together and people to jobs.

1.1.2 This project would purchase 35 new buses to be put into service on the network. These would form part of the CC tendered contracts thereby reducing the tendered cost of each service by removing the lease cost of the bus from the bus operators.

1.1.3 The provision of new vehicles would significantly improve the quality of the services making them more attractive to customers thereby increasing the number of fare paying passengers, further reducing costs.

1.1.4 The aspiration is for the project to increase the service frequency of key services on a core network to make them stronger and increase patronage. This would involve additional vehicles, but in the short term may also require further subsidy, depending on patronage. The inclusion of this element is still being considered depending on its benefit. The improvement in frequency is likely to come at a later date to accommodate patronage growth as demand increases.

1.1.5 The project will also boost the quality of the waiting environment through the continued roll-out of Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI) and improved roadside infrastructure making services more attractive to customers and increasing the number of fare paying passengers to reduce Cornwall Council’s subsidy costs and stabilise the network.

1.1.6 This project was the second highest priority for the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Transport Board to receive the £8.9M of devolved major scheme funding. Work is underway to develop a business case for it.

1.1.7 The Cornwall Bus Network scheme will inject the required level of stability into the local bus network to create a sustainable future for the services and create an environment in which operators will have the confidence to invest in the future.

1.1.8 Additionally, Cornwall would like to consider a longer term, holistic approach to improving the network through exploring an area-based franchising model and ultimately a Cornwall-wide franchise, similar to that operated by Transport for London. These types of delivery model would grant greater governance powers to Cornwall Council to set the service standards required across the network.



KEY FACTS

Scheme will improve the quality of key inter-urban services

Cornwall Council to purchase buses to run the network

Buses loaned to operators, reducing the cost of each service by removing the lease cost of the bus

New vehicles would significantly improve the quality and attractiveness of the services, thereby increasing the number of fare paying passengers and making services more sustainable

Project includes provision of Real Time Passenger Information and improved infrastructure

2 GROWTH PLAN

2.1 Vision for the local area

2.1.1 The project aims to deliver a step change in the quality of bus services within Cornwall by providing new vehicles and improved infrastructure, creating and supporting a high quality, sustainable bus network between the key towns.

2.1.2 Cornwall Council’s ‘Bus Vision’, describes its desire for a high quality bus network for Cornwall:

The Bus Vision: 2030 will see a frequent, reliable and accessible service that provides the people of Cornwall, and its visitors, with a high quality yet good value bus service. It will be the preferred travel option in Cornwall, providing a comprehensive network covering the whole of the County with interconnection with other modes at rail and bus stations. The bus service will operate to a superior quality using a modern, comfortable fleet that is fit for purpose and will make the best use of new technologies.

2.1.3 Key public transport projects such as the Central and South East Cornwall

Sustainable Transport Network (Local Sustainable Transport Fund project), the roll out of Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI) systems at stops on key routes and ITSO Smart Electronic Ticket Machines (ETM) on buses are beginning to deliver this Vision by improving bus infrastructure. However, the vehicles and the frequency at which they operate need to be improved to offer greater public appeal.

2.2 Strategic Objectives

2.2.1 The Cornwall Bus Network scheme is viewed as providing the much-needed foundation for comprehensively developing the bus network in Cornwall, moving towards a delivery model that will stabilise service provision and reduce the impact of outside changes that would affect the local network.

2.2.2 The scheme will contribute directly to several Connecting Cornwall 2030 objectives:



Ensure a resilient and reliable transport system for people, goods and services

Support the vitality and integrity of our town centres and rural communities

Increase public confidence in a safer transport network

Improve access to employment, education, healthcare and leisure.

Improve access to public transport

Encourage community participation in shaping and delivering transport services

2.2.3 The main benefits of this approach would be felt across the whole network, by providing:

A more stable operating base for operators;

More certainty over revenue funding for contracts;

An opportunity to improve quality by investing in the vehicles on the network

Improved roadside waiting infrastructure

Greater service appeal

More cost-effective network

2.2.4 Achieving these benefits would not be possible without some investment in vehicles and the operators themselves are unable to make this investment. Improving the quality of the bus network is the key to increasing passenger numbers and, in turn, making the network more sustainable.

2.3 Area Opportunities for Growth

2.3.1 Cornwall’s population has been growing steadily since the 1960s and is among the fastest growing areas of the UK. The population is predicted to grow by approximately 100,000 people to 630,000 by 2029.

2.3.2 The Local Plan to 2030 has identified permitted growth of 47,500 houses in Cornwall. As part of the Local Plan development work, town frameworks were developed for 13 towns in Cornwall which identify the scale and location of employment growth in each town. A core network of inter-urban bus services between the key commercial centres is vital to the viability of the towns and their proposed employment growth, linking businesses together and people to jobs.



Houses Jobs

Penzance/Newlyn 2150 994

St Ives/Carbis Bay 1000 664

Hayle 1400

Helston 900 664

CPIR 4500 2985

Falmouth/Penryn 2600 844

Truro 3000 2136

Newquay 3550 880

St Austell 2000 978

Bodmin 3000 636

Bude 900 499

Liskeard 1250 1026

Saltash 1000 560

Table 1: Permitted Housing and Employment Growth to 2030

2.3.3 Cornwall Council and the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Enterprise Partnership recognise that Cornwall’s bus services and infrastructure are essential to maintaining and improving the prosperity of the County.

2.3.4 Growth will create a greater desire to move around Cornwall and increase the need to travel. Without suitable alternatives to car use, this will have a consequential impact on congestion levels in Cornwall. It is therefore important to have a viable and sustainable bus network to provide a realistic alternative to the car in a rural setting with a dispersed settlement pattern

2.3.5 Modelling undertaken on suggested transport improvements and interventions for the town frameworks aimed to achieve an average of 20% modal switch to sustainable means. Due to the different characteristics of each town, the 20% could not be applied consistently but was adjusted according to existing information on towns and planned development. Transport interventions included in the town frameworks have been modelled to account for a mode switch relating to both the predicted level of housing and employment. Improved bus services and infrastructure were included in each town’s model.

2.3.6 There is excellent potential to increase bus use within the County, whilst maintaining vital services for existing users. The bus plays a vital part in the mobility of Cornwall, particularly among:

17% of Cornish households who have no access to a car;

16% of existing bus users who are accessing education (this consists of over 50% of students over 16 being frequent bus users)

18% of existing bus users who are commuters

11% of employees who commute by bus who said that they would be forced to look for another job if they no longer had a bus service

40% of existing bus users who contribute £83M of retail spend to the economy per annum.



2.3.7 Tourism is a significant economic driver and supports 40,000 jobs in Cornwall. The challenge we face is to continue to develop the tourism industry in Cornwall but ensure this is done in a sustainable way. This should allow growth without adding to the existing transport challenges experienced during the summer, which can result in negative perceptions for visitors and negative impacts on other economic sectors. The car is by far the most dominant mode of transport used by visitors to Cornwall but there is an opportunity to achieve a modal shift to buses during the tourists’ stay.

2.3.8 Bus services are not currently well integrated with train timetables and services. Train service frequency in Cornwall varies significantly and can be as much as 1½ hours during the day. Services do not run to a clockface timetable and the opportunity to deliver integrated transport with the rest of the public transport network is limited.

2.3.9 There is an opportunity to encourage more multi-modal travel in conjunction with rail projects proposed through the Growth Deal mechanism which will provide much improved opportunities for integration with the proposed bus network. The Great Western Mainline Signalling project will install 3 additional sets of signals on the mainline in Cornwall to reduce existing signal block lengths and allow more trains to operate. This aims to use the cascade of existing rolling stock from the Thames Valley and the new franchise process to secure half hourly mainline rail services for Cornwall (one regional and one intercity London service per hour) which will provide greater opportunities for connecting services.

2.3.10 Consideration has been given as to whether the or not there is potential to deliver the Cornwall SEP Schemes through market funding sources. This has been done by examining the overall cost of the SEP schemes (£210.4m) and setting it against funds already raised via planning obligations, LTP funds and grants such as European Regional Development Funding (£96.3). The calculation then looks at the maximum private sector funding likely to be raised for transport schemes through the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

2.3.11 The potential CIL contributions are calculated by totalling the remaining housing targets within the local plan period (22,089 dwellings), removing the 40% affordable dwellings that will not be eligible for CIL (leaving 12,830 dwellings). This figure has then been converted into square meters by multiplying by the average new build house size of 76sqm

1. It should be noted that this makes the robust assumption that

all of these houses will be eligible for CIL within the next 5 years. This is highly optimistic and it is therefore unlikely that the full amount assumed to come from CIL could be delivered in the short term.

1 the average new build house size taken from RIBA report "The Case for Space" page 12



2.3.12 Cornwall Council has produced a draft Community Infrastructure Levy Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

2 that sets out the maximum viable charging rates within the

county (these vary between £100/sqm and £0/sqm depending on area). These rates have then been applied to the housing figures, giving a total of £46.3m raised through CIL. Of this, it has been assumed that 33% (£15.3m) will be allocated to transport schemes. Again, this is considered to be a robust estimate.

2.3.13 Combining the £96.3m already raised and the £15.3m potentially raised via CIL gives a total of £111.6m, leaving a funding shortfall of £98.8m prior to any growth deal funds received. The full calculation is included as Appendix A and is summarised in the following table:

Secured Funds £96.3m

Anticipated CIL Funding £15.3m

Total Funds Available £111.6m

Total cost of SEP Schemes £210.4m

Funding Shortfall £98.8m

Table 2: Funding Shortfall Summary

2.3.14 It is clear that some form of external intervention is needed, with the Growth Deal anticipated to cover the majority of this shortfall.

2.4 Area Barriers to Growth

2.4.1 Population density across the County is low, with a population of 532,300 (2011 census) over an area of 3,563 square km – a density of 144 people per sq km. This makes it the largest Unitary Authority in England in population terms, and second in England in terms of area. The provision of a comprehensive bus network for all is therefore a challenge over such a dispersed area.

2.4.2 Travel behaviour in Cornwall is heavily influenced by the settlement pattern and the way that the towns and villages have grown and changed their function and their relationships to each other.

2.4.3 Cornwall lacks a major urban centre and the main towns are small by national comparison. Cornwall’s population is scattered, with a large proportion of people living outside towns with populations greater than 3,000.

2.4.4 When comparing Cornwall with other southwest counties, the bus mode share is one of the lowest at 2.4%. The dispersed settlement pattern of Cornwall and the distance travelled to work and to access services is greater than many other areas. The average distance travelled to work is the highest in the southwest region at over 17 kilometres (13km is national average).

2 http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/idoc.ashx?docid=8836b4f2-f7e9-4579-a59f-0f6d5fe08231&version=-1



Figure 1: Cornwall population density (2011 Census)

2.4.5 The bus network in Cornwall is in a period of instability caused by significant changes in the level of funding for service and infrastructure investment and reductions in fare paying passengers which has resulted in very low operating margins.

2.4.6 Operators are reimbursed by the local authority for carrying passengers in receipt of an English National Concessionary Travel Scheme card (ENCTS). ENCTS reimbursements to operators are demand led and, as such, must be covered by the local authority with less control than regular budgets. The reimbursement rate for ENCTS is set by the local authority and the calculation for it is based on the average adult single fare. In order to increase the level of fare-box revenue, operators increase their fares. This in turn has a knock-on effect on the amount that the authority must pay the operators. In 2013, one operator increased their fares by over 30%. As a comparison, a Cornwall day ticket with this operator is now 64% more expensive than the national average day ticket fare.

2.4.7 These factors have resulted in a shrinking network with less frequent services with poor reliability (only 79% of buses in Cornwall were on time in 12/13) and a perceived lack of quality (the average age of buses in Cornwall is 12 years).

2.4.8 Government funding for bus services is reducing and local authorities have less revenue funding to subsidise services and capital funding for infrastructure year on year. Local authorities are reviewing their existing networks and prioritising services for the future. As operators are making operating losses in the current market, they do not have the capacity to invest in their networks. Without this much-needed investment through the Cornwall Bus Network scheme, the appeal of bus services to new and existing passengers will continue to reduce, perpetuating the cycle of decline.



2.5 Evidence

Deprivation

2.5.2 Cornwall is one of the poorest areas of the UK. Total workplace gross annual median earnings in 2013 were £17,390 at 79% of the UK average. (Full-time £21,630, Part-time £8,611). Total resident gross annual earnings at £18,346, 84% of the UK average.

2.5.3 In the 2010 Index of Multiple Deprivation, 11% of the population of Cornwall lived in the 20% most deprived areas in England.

2.5.4 19% of households are estimated to be in fuel poverty in Cornwall, higher than the England average of 16%. Fuel poverty is defined broadly as a situation where a household spends more than 10% of its income on fuel costs.

2.5.5 Cornwall aims for a long term approach to tackle transport poverty in a rural area where activities and services are more widely dispersed, public transport costs are high, information is inadequate, and services are infrequent or impractical

3.

Cornwall’s population of lower skilled workers will experience greater constraints on their mobility and barriers to accessing services because of the high costs of car ownership and the absence of practical alternatives.

2.5.6 ‘Forced car ownership’ is an issue in Cornwall whereby people on lower income levels in rural areas have no real transport alternatives to the private car; car ownership is an item of household expenditure that cannot be foregone

4.

Journey to Work Data

2.5.7 Although now rather aged data, the 2001 Census still gives us one of the only comprehensive datasets on travel habits.

2.5.8 When comparing Cornwall with other southwest counties, the bus mode share is one of the lowest at 2.4%:

Work mainly at or from home

Rail Train Bus,

minibus or coach

Taxi M’bike Car or

van

Passenger in a car or

van Bike

On foot

Other

Cornwall 15.8% 0.1% 0.9% 2.4% 0.3% 1.1% 60.2% 5.1% 1.5% 11.8% 0.7%

Devon 16.0% 0.1% 1.4% 3.7% 0.2% 1.0% 56.1% 4.8% 2.6% 13.4% 0.6%

Dorset 14.7% 0.1% 1.2% 2.6% 0.2% 1.1% 61.4% 4.6% 2.8% 10.8% 0.6%

Somerset 14.3% 0.1% 0.8% 1.7% 0.2% 1.0% 60.4% 5.1% 3.8% 12.3% 0.4%

SOUTH WEST

12.6% 0.1% 1.4% 4.6% 0.3% 1.1% 58.7% 5.0% 3.4% 12.2% 0.5%

England 10.3% 4.0% 5.2% 7.3% 0.5% 0.8% 54.0% 4.9% 2.9% 9.8% 0.5%

Table 3: Travel to Work Modal Split

3 Sustrans (Sep 2012) Tackling Transport Poverty

4 Banister (1993) Internalising the Social Costs of Transport



Bus Network

2.5.9 Cornwall’s bus network is dominated by two main operators – First Devon and Cornwall, and Western Greyhound. There are six or seven other independent operators, with a further 20 community transport services and 250 school buses. Figure 2 provides details of the network coverage and the frequency across the Cornwall bus network. This demonstrates strong inter-urban links with most towns connected by hourly or better services. The network map shows some clear gaps in services in areas to the north and east of the County, and whilst frequencies are relatively good in areas of higher population, there are very few areas where service frequencies are better than every half hour.

Figure 2: Existing Cornwall bus network (2012)

2.5.10 The wide reach of the bus network is therefore vital to connecting smaller settlements with areas of employment and essential services, and also to key interchange points for onward connections.

2.5.11 A study carried out in April 2013 into the stability of the bus network in Cornwall appraised the network against a series of key indicators that contribute to market stability:

Passenger Numbers;

Fares

Network mileage and coverage

Quality of operation

Operator stability



2.5.12 These indicators have been considered through the use of data provided directly from Cornwall Council and the use of the following datasets:

DfT Annual Bus Statistics 2010/11

Competition Commission, Local Bus Services Market Investigation, Provisional Findings Report

Passenger Focus, 2009 Bus Passenger Survey

First Bus Handbook, 2011

TAS, Bus Industry Monitor

TAS, 2011 Bus Fares Study

Passenger Numbers

2.5.13 A key factor of market stability is sustained growth in passenger levels and evidence of modal shift, demonstrating the bus market is strong.

2.5.14 Passenger levels across the region have shown a slight increase since deregulation, performing well when compared with other regions of the UK. Cornwall experienced a 60% increase in bus patronage growth between 2004 and 2010. However, patronage is now declining (from 12.8m in 10/11 to 11.7m in 12/13).

2.5.15 When considering passenger levels, it is important to consider the level of English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) travellers as these fares are reimbursed to the operator by the authority. However, the ENCTS Grant has been cut in recent years, which can lead to a significant shortfall between the level of reimbursement paid to operators by local authorities and the grants received by authorities. In Cornwall, 74% of the eligible population has an ENCTS pass, this compares with 70% across England as a whole

5.

2.5.16 115,200 people are aged 65 or over – 22% of the total county population. This compares with 16.4% across England and Wales. All of this age group are entitled to concessionary travel on the bus network via the nationwide ENCTS scheme and the ENCTS account for 45% of all journeys on the Cornish network

6 (note this includes

use by those on holiday in the county). This compares with an average across the UK of 36%

7. Figure 3 provides a comparison of Cornwall against other areas of the

UK.

5 DfT Concessionary Travel Statistics 2011/12 6 Cornwall Council data 2011/12 7 DfT Annual Bus Statistics 2010/11



Figure 3: Concessionary passenger levels (DfT Annual Bus Statistics 2010/11, supplemented with CC data)

2.5.17 In relation to passenger levels, Cornwall’s network shows a mixed picture. The sustained growth in passenger numbers until 2010/11 looked positive, especially when compared with the national average and the wider southwest region. However, the recent decline in patronage, coupled with the high levels of ENCTS journeys (meaning a reduction in fare paying journeys) means market failure in the long term is a real possibility.

Fares

2.5.18 The level at which fares are set is an indicator of market stability by striking a balance between the ability of operators to cover costs and ensuring services are affordable for customers. In Cornwall this is of particular interest due to the areas of deprivation and dispersed population meaning that cheap transport is an essential need.

2.5.19 Figure 4 provides a summary of day ticket prices across the region. Both Western Greyhound and First exhibit higher than average fare prices, suggesting the balance between covering costs and providing affordability may not be being achieved. However, Western Greyhound consider that due to the lack of network competition, their services, and therefore fares, are not competing directly in the market place. Rather they are competing with the costs of alternative modes of private car and the rail network.



Figure 4: Daily ticket prices (TAS 2011 Bus Fares Study, supplemented with fare information from operator websites)

2.5.20 When considering the satisfaction of passengers in relation to ticket prices, surprisingly Cornwall shows higher than average satisfaction amongst fare-paying passengers. However, the level at which the fares are set is considerably higher than average and is therefore likely to contribute to market failure if this differential is maintained.

Network mileage and coverage

2.5.21 The extent of any network coverage can be used to consider the relative stability of bus operations, especially when compared with the density of a population. Cornwall has, as discussed earlier, a dispersed population, necessitating an extensive bus network in order to provide the majority of the population with a quality service.

2.5.22 At a regional level, the southwest is outperforming regions outside London on mileage increase since the deregulation of bus services. However, when considering the level of vehicle workings, Cornwall has a greater than average number compared with the wider southwest region, but a lower than average level of vehicle workings per head. This is indicative of both the size of Cornwall and the dispersed nature of the population, because although there is a higher than average level of bus provision, it is providing a lower than average level of service to customers.



Figure 5: Vehicle workings per thousand residents – SW Region (DfT Annual Bus Statistics 2010/11)

Quality of Service

2.5.23 The level of service provided by the operators is often representative of the stability of a network. Punctuality in Cornwall is shown to be lower than the southwest average and is declining. There are very few bus priority measures across the county, making parts of the network subject to congestion delay at times of heavy traffic on the highway network.

Average



Figure 6: Punctuality of non-frequent services in the southwest region (DfT Annual Bus Statistics 2010/11)

Vehicle Fleet Comparison

2.5.24 In terms of quality, there is stark contrast. When considering the vehicle fleet of First Devon & Cornwall’s operations within Cornwall, there appears to be an overemphasis on double deckers, rarely at capacity, and coaches at the expense of more appropriately sized midibuses and the age of vehicles is in general well above average.

Type Minibus Super-mini Midibus Single Double Coach Total

Great Britain

8

Total 62 2,289 10,105 8,590 14,025 1,188 36,259

% 0.2% 6.3% 27.9% 23.7% 38.7% 3.3% 100.0%

Av Age 5.0 7.0 8.4 7.4 7.5 7.7 7.7

South West

Total 4 292 807 342 781 101 2,327

% 0.2% 12.5% 34.7% 14.7% 33.6% 4.3% 100.0%

Av Age 6.0 9.2 9.3 6.8 9.1 8.2 8.8

FDC9

Total 1 13 29 13 51 12 119

% 0.8% 10.9% 24.4% 10.9% 42.9% 10.1% 100.0%

Av Age 8.0 10.2 9.8 6.0 15.1 11.2 11.8

Western Greyhound

10

Total 40 48 20 6 114

% 35.1% 42.1% 17.5% 5.3% 100%

Av Age

Table 4: Vehicle Fleet Comparison (TAS Bus Industry Monitor and First Bus Handbook 2011)

2.5.25 The poor quality of vehicles is not conducive to attracting new customers and achieving long term modal shift.

The Public Service Vehicle (PSV) Accessibility Regulations 2000 mean that buses and coaches that are authorised to carry more than 22 passengers and are registered on or after 1 January 2001 must be accessible to wheelchair users. This change in regulations has meant that older vehicles are gradually being phased out across the country for more appropriate accessible vehicles.

Operator Stability

2.5.26 To achieve a high quality stable bus network, the financial stability of operators is essential.

2.5.27 Of greatest concern to Cornwall Council at present, is the stability of the two main operators – First Devon and Cornwall and Western Greyhound. The profitability of both operators is very low, if not negative – this is in stark contrast to the other main operators across the region as demonstrated in Figure 7.

8 Great Britain and South West: 2009 data

9 FDC: 2012 data.

10 WG – Data from Little Red Book 2013. This does not include vehicle age data.



Figure 7: Operator Profitability in the South West (TAS Bus Industry Monitor)

2.5.28 A similar story is told when considering the operator return on capital employed in the south west:



Figure 8: Operator return on capital employed in the South West (TAS Bus Industry Monitor)

2.5.29 It is clear than an alternative financial model is required if an improved service is to be provided for customers in a manner that is financially sustainable for operators. There is a real risk of market failure and the Council becoming the operator of last resort without significant improvements in the financial status of both First Devon and Cornwall and Western Greyhound.

2.5.30 There is a general acceptance that the overall service, quality and image of the bus in Cornwall need to be improved in order to attract new customers, especially from the car. There are gaps in the provision of the network particularly in north and east Cornwall that reflect the sparse population in those areas. The frequency of services is poor with few areas where frequencies are better than every half hour. Higher frequency services are located in areas of higher demand around Truro and Camborne, Pool and Redruth. The average age of buses is improving with new vehicles being provided by some operators on services, but there is a variable standard and quality of vehicle within and across the operators. Improvements in vehicle standard are reliant on investment by them. There is also limited integrated ticketing between operators or other forms of public transport, limiting passenger choice.

2.5.31 Existing bus infrastructure provision in Cornwall is variable with low levels of bus priority and standards of shelter. Provision of shelters has proved challenging in some areas.



2.5.32 A recent Local Sustainable Transport Fund project has seen the roll out of new bus shelters that will be equipped with RTPI. These new shelters are the new standard for shelter that Cornwall Council will continue to roll out across the County as part of a rolling programme.

2.5.33 In terms of delivery of the scheme, the Council already has in place a number of framework contracts that will significantly simplify matters:

Framework contracts for the purchase of buses already exist

Framework contract for the provision of RTPI already exists

Framework contract for the provision of the bus shelters already exists

Cornwall Assessment Tool 2.5.1 In order to assess the merit of the various transport schemes being considered within

the County, Cornwall Council developed the Cornwall Assessment Tool (CAT). The CAT is intended to provide a mechanism for assessing and prioritising schemes submitted to the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Transport Board (CISLTB) for major scheme funding, in accordance with the Assurance Framework. The methodology was approved at the CISLTB meeting of 6 June 2013.

2.5.2 The CAT assessment methodology provides a mechanism to assess candidate schemes against a range of criteria. The criteria are aligned to the key cases that need to be demonstrated as part of a Business Case submission, as detailed in the DfT guidance on Transport Business Cases

11.

2.5.3 The CAT consists of a number of stages, as follows:

Gateway

Costs summary (which informs the Commercial and Financial Cases)

Risks (which informs the Management Case)

Strategic assessment (which informs the Strategic Case)

Assessment against Connecting Cornwall goals (which informs the Economics Case and development of the AST)

Benefits assessment (which informs the Economics Case) 2.5.4 The scoring methodology includes assessment of the scheme against the objectives

of Cornwall Council (detailed in Cornwall Council’s Local Transport Plan, Connecting Cornwall: 2030) and national transport objectives (as set out in the Appraisal Summary Table that forms part of WebTAG).

2.5.5 The CAT produces an appraisal summary table (AST) using information provided within both the flow charts and other elements of the CAT. Where possible quantitative information is provided. In all cases, a qualitative assessment is carried out against the AST criteria, using the seven point scale set out in WebTAG, again ranging from a large beneficial impact to a large adverse impact.

2.5.6 The information collected through the CAT process is collated in an output ‘Summary Sheet’. This highlights the key elements of the assessment against the 5 business cases that form part of the Transport Business Case.

2.5.7 The methodology is set out in the following diagram:

11

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85930/dft-transport-business-case.pdf



Figure 9: CAT Methodology

2.5.8 The Summary Sheet and output summary table for the scheme are included as Appendix B of this note.

2.6 Alternative Solutions

2.6.1 Cornwall would like the opportunity to discuss progressive options for a long term approach to the delivery of the bus network that focuses on the provision of a sustainable, high quality network that vastly improves access and appeals to new and existing passengers.

2.6.2 Area franchises would allow the division of Cornwall in to distinctive areas that would be tendered to bus operators. Operators would bid for all services contained within the defined area and be responsible for the operation of these services to a standard specified by Cornwall Council. The provision of improved roadside waiting infrastructure, Real Time Passenger Information and smart ticketing will much improve the bus product and create a greater appeal to new users.

2.6.3 A Transport for London style franchise would see the tendering of the Cornwall bus network as a franchise where Cornwall Council sets the overall specified standard and level of service. This option is similar to the option above but covers the whole of Cornwall.



2.7 Potential to Reduce Costs

2.7.1 The pressures on revenue funding within the Council are already a concern and the situation is likely to worsen. The purchase of 35 buses to inject into the network is considered a low cost option to stabilise the network through a greater balance of capital and revenue funding. While considering the purchase of a smaller number of vehicles, the benefits are only likely to be felt in the relevant areas where the buses have been deployed and the knock-on effects for operators in terms of reducing the operating costs of their services are unlikely to be sufficiently positive enough to make a strong enough difference.

2.8 Fallback Situation

2.8.1 There would be no reduction in the amount of annual revenue funding the Council would need to find to support bus services. This would put bus service provision at risk.

2.8.2 If Growth Deal funding is not secured alternative funding sources would need to be found. This could be through use of Local Transport Plan (LTP) funding but this would have a consequential impact on CC’s ability to fund other transport projects and use LTP as a match to Growth Deal and Community Infrastructure Funding constraining CC’s ability to deliver transport projects through these priorities.

2.8.3 The project will not progress if funding is not secured.



KEY FACTS

Scheme cost £10.4m

£7.5m on Vehicles

£2.875m on Infrastructure

BCR – 11.5

Large Beneficial Impact to transport benefits and reliability as well as regeneration and wider economic effect.

No consents required, fully deliverable under statutory powers

Existing framework contracts in place to help deliver projects

Monitoring measures agreed and in place

3 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

3.1 Costs Estimate

3.1.1 The cost estimate for the scheme is summarised below in Table 5:

Cost heading Cost (£000s)

Date estimated Status

Vehicle costs 7,500 Mar 2016 - Apr 2016 Estimated

Infrastructure 2,500 June 2016 - Dec 2016 Estimated

TOTAL 10,375

Table 5: Cost estimate summary

3.2 Funding Profile

3.2.1 Table 66 shows the anticipated funding profile for the delivery of the bus network improvement works:



£000s

Cornwall Council Funding

2,375

CISLTB 8,000

TOTAL 10,375

Table 6: Anticipated funding profile

3.3 Economic Appraisal

3.3.1 The economic appraisal of each scheme has been carried out using TUBA, using outputs from the transport models. In most cases, this appraisal only used the neutral month AM and PM peak hour matrices, hence the appraisal does not include interpeak, off-peak or seasonal time periods; also, no accident benefits have been included. The appraisal is therefore considered to be a conservative estimate of scheme benefits.

3.3.2 As the transport models generally only include future year traffic forecasts for 2030, the TUBA modelling used the base year models as the opening year, and the 2030 models as the future year. For the assessment of the public transport and sustainable schemes, the reduction in traffic demand as a result of the schemes was only included in 2030 (and not in the base year models).

3.3.3 Annualisation factors of 253 were used for both the AM and PM peak periods, to represent the 253 typical weekdays per year

3.3.4 The results of the 2030 modelling detailed above were used to complete a Transport Users Benefit Appraisal (TUBA) Appraisal Summary Table (For the scheme.

3.3.5 The TUBA has been repeated based on the results of the 2015 and 2030 modelling. The TUBA assessments have only used the AM and PM hour inputs, and have not assumed any benefits for the interpeak or off-peak periods. They have also assumed delays in the Do Nothing scenario are cut-off at 5 minutes per vehicle. The scheme would have a BCR of 11.5.

3.3.6 The scheme is anticipated to unlock 280 dwellings and 909 jobs, leading to a GVA of £32.42m.

3.3.7 An updated scheme impacts pro forma is included within the CAT outputs attached as Appendix B of this note.

3.4 Value for Money

3.4.1 An updated Appraisal Summary Table (AST) is included within the CAT outputs attached as Appendix B of this note.

3.4.2 There are no significant negative impacts associated with the scheme.

3.4.3 There are large benefits for the economy (Business users & transport providers and Regeneration) and Social (Commuting and Other users).



3.4.4 The scheme would produce significant economic benefits as shown in the AST. The economic appraisal has shown that the scheme would represent very high value for money.

3.4.5 In terms of the risk to value for money, the scheme appraisal has demonstrated that the scheme would produce very high value for money. The traffic models are accurately validated and that delays experienced at the junction are not overestimated. In addition, the economic appraisal has been completed with half the level of growth contained in the Local Plan to 2030, and using base year traffic flows (as provided in the scheme impacts pro-forma); these sensitivity tests also demonstrate that the scheme would provide very high value for money. Therefore, there is very little risk that the scheme would not deliver significant economic benefits and represent very high value for money.

3.5 Pooling of economic spend across Local Enterprise Partnership area

3.5.1 The assessment work for the Local Plan identifies a package of measures that would be required to deliver the allocated growth across the county. Cornwall Council is currently developing a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) policy, based on the improvements identified that would allow funds to be gathered over the long term.

3.5.2 The CIL methodology includes costings for bus infrastructure.

3.5.3 The emerging Community Infrastructure Levy will allow Cornwall Council as the local authority to charge developers a proportionate sum based on the size and type of development and their impact on the transport network. Until CIL is confirmed Cornwall Council will continue to seek a proportionate sum from each development based on a per trip cost rate to secure S106 funds.

3.5.4 It is anticipated that the scheme will be delivered through a combination of SEP and Cornwall Council direct contributions

3.6 Assessment of deliverability

3.6.1 The scheme is considered readily deliverable in technical terms, as it requires minimal changes to existing infrastructure before implementation.

3.6.2 A smaller scale examples of a Council supported scheme is the Truro Park and Ride service, where vehicles are owned by the authority and the tender covers the operation of the specified service.

3.6.3 A report setting out evidence of past successful delivery of similar projects by CC is in included as Appendix C.



3.7 Impact of Scheme on Statutory Environmental Constraints

3.7.1 The research undertaken to date for this scheme has not identified any statutory environmental constraints. The scheme is not located within or in close proximity to the following environmental designations/constraints:

Historic Settlement

Conservation Area

Special Areas for Conservation

Special Protection Areas

Local Nature Reserve

National Nature Reserve

Heritage Coast

Area of Great Scientific Value

Area of Great Historic Value

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Source Protection Zone

Site of Special Scientific Interest

Flood Zones

Tree Protection Order Area

3.7.2 Please refer to the Environment Section within the Appraisal Summary Table (Appendix B) for further information on statutory environmental constraints.

3.8 Statutory Powers and Consents

3.8.1 The Council will rely on its statutory powers under the Town and Country Planning Act and would deliver through the General Permitted Development Order 1995.No additional powers or consents are required for this scheme.

There are no public rights of way affected by the proposals

There would be no requirement for a Side Road Order as it is not affecting other roads than those that utilise the junction

Statutory Undertakers would not be affected by the project

3.9 Land Acquisition

3.9.1 No land is required to complete any aspect of the project.

3.10 Risk Allowance

3.10.1 The cost schedule includes a basic contingency of 10%. Further articulation of the contingency-based risk allowance will take place as part of the scheme development process covering Cornwall Council’s elements and other aspects associated with bus service contracting. This will be underpinned by a Quantified Risk Assessment, as required for Business Case completion.

3.10.2 In addition to contingency planning, an allowance for Optimism Bias will be factored into later iterations of the value for money analysis. This is intended to reflect ‘blue sky’ risk which would not normally enter a formal risk management environment but is still there in any event. This figure is only of interest to the appraisal process and not cost planning and management.



3.11 Monitoring and Evaluation

3.11.1 Evaluation of the Cornwall Bus Network Scheme is a DFT requirement and needs to be completed as a condition of the major scheme bid funding allocated to the project. The evaluation needs to assess impacts and the extent to which the access improvement scheme achieves the intended objectives and therefore whether value for money has been achieved. In addition to satisfying DfT requirements, the lessons learned will also inform future scheme design and delivery.

3.11.2 The assessment of the Cornwall Bus Network Scheme will result in a range of outputs, outcomes and impacts, many of which can be directly measured or observed. The evaluation will capture directly measurable indicators, as well as wider indirect indicators in order to build a picture of the impacts resulting from the scheme.

3.11.3 In accordance with DfT guidance for standard evaluation an initial report will be prepared within 2 years of scheme opening, and will be followed by a further report prepared within 6 years of scheme opening (2023).

Research Questions

3.11.4 The following key questions will be addressed:

How has the scheme increased frequency of services?

How has the scheme improved quality, public image and subsequently patronage levels?

How has the scheme increased public confidence in a safer transport network?

Has the scheme improved access to employment, education, healthcare and leisure?

How has the scheme reduced traffic congestion and transport emissions?

3.11.5 Table 7 below summarises the indicators to be used to assess the effectiveness of the scheme against the objectives.

Objective Evaluation Indicator Measurable

Increase frequency of bus services. Improved bus time table, route coverage and increase in service frequently.

Comparison of pre and post scheme service, route, network coverage and frequency data.

Improve quality, public image and patronage levels

Increase in fee paying passengers

Pre and post scheme patronage numbers, customer satisfaction surveys

Increase public confidence in a safer transport network?

Reduction in accident rates, safer waiting and travel environments

Accident data, customer satisfaction surveys

Improve access to employment, education, healthcare and leisure

Uplift in sustainable travel modes Decrease in private car travel

Travel Plan monitoring surveys, Travel Surveys, Manual Classified counts public transport patronage figures

Reduced traffic congestion and transport emissions?

Queue lengths, delay data and Journey times

Traffic counts, journey time surveys, Queue length surveys

Table 7: Scheme objectives and evaluation indicators



Data Requirements

3.11.6 The measures to be used, as specified in the DfT guidance ‘Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Local Authority Major Schemes’, are set out in Table 8 below.

Measures Data to be used Data Collection Methods

Data Collection timing

Rationale for Inclusion

Scheme Build Progress against milestones

Works monitoring Monthly reporting during delivery

Determine planned inputs are delivered

Delivered Scheme

Description of the delivered scheme including quantities

Observation of scheme outputs

Post opening Accountability

Costs Outturn scheme costs and maintenance cost

Financial monitoring system and LTP maintenance programme

Monthly reporting during delivery an annually

Accountability

Scheme Objectives

Planning completions, economic activity, traffic flows, queue lengths

Planning completions, employment data, ATC and manual classified count data, journey surveys, queue length survey

Pre scheme and 1 and 5 years post completion

Accountability

Travel Demand Traffic Flows Journey surveys Pre scheme and 1 and 5 years post completion

Accountability / Knowledge

Travel times and reliability

Journey times Pre scheme and 1 and 5 years post completion


Impact on the economy

Journey times and economic activity

Pre scheme and 1 and 5 years post completion


Carbon Traffic volume, speed and vehicle classification

DfT Carbon tool Pre scheme and 1 and 5 years post completion

Table 8: Monitoring and Evaluation Measures

3.12 Wider Tasks

3.12.1 Cornwall would like the opportunity to discuss progressive options for a long term approach to the delivery of the bus network that focuses on the provision of a sustainable, high quality network that vastly improves access and appeals to new and existing passengers.

3.12.2 Area franchises would allow the division of Cornwall in to distinctive areas that would be tendered to bus operators. Operators would bid for all services contained within the defined area and be responsible for the operation of these services to a standard specified by Cornwall Council. The provision of improved roadside waiting infrastructure, Real Time Passenger Information and smart ticketing will much improve the bus product and create a greater appeal to new users.



3.12.3 A Transport for London style franchise would see the tendering of the Cornwall bus network as a franchise where Cornwall Council sets the overall specified standard and level of service. This option is similar to the option above but covers the whole of Cornwall.



KEY FACTS

Start of Design – November 2015

Completion of Design – February 2016

Start of works – June 2016

Completion of works – Mar 2017

4 DELIVERY PLAN

4.1 Governance

4.1.1 The scheme will be delivered by Cornwall Council. Delivery routes and responsibilities, programme management and the monitoring and managing of risk will be discharged through a structure comprising a Project Board, Project Management Team and Contractor Teams.

4.1.2 Development and delivery of the project will in practice be handled in a partnership manner involving the organisations noted on the management structure.

4.1.3 Partnership responsibilities will need to be set out formally, with appropriate agreements set out and signed up to by stakeholders

4.1.4 Joint LEP/Cornwall Council Corporate Programme Board supported by Project Board with key roles as follows:

Senior Responsible Officer: Director of Economy and Environment, Cornwall Council

Executive: Head of Capital Projects, Cornwall Council

Senior Users: Transport Planning and Strategy Manager, Cornwall Council, Cornwall Council Economic Development Representative LEP Representative`

Senior Suppliers: Bus operators

Engineering Design Manager – Cormac Solutions

Contractor’s Area Manager – Cormac Solutions

Bus operators

Project Manager: Senior Project Manager – Cornwall Council

4.1.5 A project governance document is included as Appendix D this includes a project organogram.



4.2 Stakeholder Management

4.2.1 Cornwall Council is a unitary authority. This reduces the number of external stakeholders involved. Key external stakeholders in this project would be the local bus operators, transport interest and user groups and other transport operators.

4.2.2 Consultation would be carried out with consultees in accordance with the type and level of scheme being delivered. Consultation with some of these groups is dependent on the scheme rather than a statutory requirement. The list below is over and above the statutory consultees.

Town and Parish Councils

Local Cornwall Council Members

Police, Fire and Ambulance

AA, Road Haulage Association and Freight Transport Association

Local Bus Operators

Cycle Groups

Motorcycle Groups

Chamber of Commerce

Residents Associations

Frontagers

Town Forums

Disability Groups

Access Forums

Transport Interest Groups

4.2.3 Consultation is carried out in a number of ways that could include, Statutory Notices, Site Notices, Letters and Plans, Public Press Releases, Public exhibition, Website and Electronic Consultation.

4.2.4 There is no need to purchase land in terms of the land required to deliver the improvements.



4.3 Risk Allocation and Transfer

4.3.1 The risk management strategy will be developed at an early stage of the project. This will identify risks the probability and impact of them occurring together with the risk owner.

4.4 Preferred Procurement Route

4.4.1 Framework contracts already exist for the purchase of buses, the provision of real time passenger information and the provision of the bus shelters and these will be utilised to provide this infrastructure.

4.4.2 CC will manage the bus service contracts for which it will be including the vehicles and undergo tendering via its standard process.

4.4.3 All procurements will be in accordance with Cornwall Council Rules and Procedures, and are aligned with national and European public procurement regulations. Key areas of resource procured within the project are:

Development and Design Services

‘In – House’ Resource. - Formerly referred to as the Council’s ‘Engineering Design Group’, in-house resource, is provided by ‘Cormac Solutions’. Recent structural changes within Cornwall Council have established Cormac Solutions, a professional services company, as an ‘arms-length’ Management Organisation through which it appoints design services for its capital development programmes. Cormac Solutions are covered by a ‘Teckal exemption’ which enables CC to commission directly without competitive tender.

Development and Design Services – Strategic Partnership Contract Assistance for design was procured from Cornwall Council’s Strategic Partnership Contract which appointed Parsons Brinkerhoff (PB) as the Council’s civil engineering strategic design partner in April 2010 after a restricted European procurement procedure (PIN ID: 2009-064995, Contract Notice: 2209/S 187-269581. The contract is for 2 years +1 +1 (4 years maximum). In March 2013 Cormac Solutions concluded a Framework Panel procurement exercise for its design work. Subsequently Parsons Brinckerhoff was re-appointed as a strategic partner to provide additional technical design and project management expertise and support. This followed the OJEU process and complies with the Public Procurement Regulations

4.5 Partnership Bodies

4.5.1 Cornwall Council is a unitary authority. This reduces the number of partnership organisations, and therefore reduces the potential risk associated with such arrangements. The junction improvements will be fully designed and delivered by organisations working for the Council

4.5.2 Cornwall Council will liaise closely with our partners in the Local Transport Body (LTB) and the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP). Both are supportive of this scheme, and recognise the importance of delivering an improvement here for the continued economic prosperity of the towns.



4.6 Delivery, timeline and clear milestones

4.6.1 The indicative timeline for the project is as set out below:

Activity (Prince 2 Stages) Period/Status

Stage 0 Pre-Project Feasibility May – December 2014

Stage 1 Preliminary Design January – May 2015

Stage 2 Planning and Orders and Land assembly

June – October 2015

Stage 3 Detailed design November 2015 – February 2016

Stage 4 Procurement Vehicles & Infrastructure: March – April 2016 Services: June – August 2016

Stage 5 Construction Infrastructure: June - December 2016 Submission of service changes to Traffic Commissioner: January – March 2017

Stage 6 Project Closure Services: April 2017

Stage 7 Review and Monitoring 2018-2019

Table 9: Indicative project timeline

Appendix A CIL Calculations

Cornwall CIL Contribution Viability Calculation

Pla

nn

ing

pe

rmis

sio

ns

no

t st

art

ed

an

d/o

r

un

de

r co

nst

ruct

ion

Ma

jor

pla

nn

ing

pe

rmis

sio

ns

gra

nte

d s

ince

the

Ap

ril

20

13

To

tal

pe

rmis

sio

ns

an

d c

om

ple

tio

ns

to b

e

de

du

cte

d f

rom

Pla

n’s

ta

rge

t (C

om

mit

me

nts

).

Re

ma

inin

g t

arg

et

aft

er

de

du

ctin

g

com

mit

me

nts

fro

m P

AC

’s d

istr

ibu

tio

n o

f th

e

47

,50

0 t

arg

et

Aff

ord

ab

le h

ou

sin

g t

arg

et

Re

sult

ing

nu

mb

er

of

cha

rge

ab

le d

we

llin

gs

Ho

usi

ng

Zo

ne

*

Via

ble

co

ntr

ibu

tio

n (

£/s

qm

)

Re

sult

ing

co

ntr

ibu

tio

n p

er

76

sqm

av

era

ge

dw

ell

ing

**

To

tal

CIL

ra

ise

d f

rom

ho

usi

ng

Gra

nt

(ER

DF

etc

.)

LTP

20

11

-20

15

Oth

er

S1

06

fu

nd

s se

cure

d

Penzance / Newlyn 1400 2000 2150 104 457 561 1589 40% 953 H2 40£ 3,040£ 2,898,336£ 132,000£ 158,000£ -£ 1,314,000£

West Penwith CNA residual 1100 1600 1000 153 458 611 389 40% 233 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,773,840£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Hayle 1300 800 1400 61 1006 1067 333 40% 200 H2 40£ 3,040£ 607,392£ -£ 2,609,000£ 10,285,000£ 535,000£

St Ives-Carbis Bay 750 1100 1000 270 357 627 373 50% 187 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,417,400£ 8,650,000£ 2,150,000£ -£ -£

Hayle and St Ives CNA residual 350 400 350 106 133 239 111 40% 67 H2 40£ 3,040£ 202,464£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Helston 900 1000 900 184 275 459 441 40% 265 H3 -£ -£ -£ -£ 50,000£ -£ -£

Helston and the Lizard CNA residual 900 1800 1100 201 422 623 477 40% 286 H2 40£ 3,040£ 870,048£ -£ -£ -£ -£

CPIR 4000 3400 4500 525 2893 3418 1082 40% 649 H3 -£ -£ -£ 10,069,000£ 750,000£ 17,688,000£ 1,650,000£

CPR CNA residual 500 1300 800 136 266 402 398 40% 239 H3 -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Falmouth- Penryn 3200 2400 2600 405 772 300 1477 1123 40% 674 H1 100£ 7,600£ 5,120,880£ -£ 793£ -£ 528,200£

Falmouth and Penryn CNA residual 800 1000 500 80 81 161 339 40% 203 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,545,840£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Truro-Threemilestone-Shortlanesend 2200 2100 3000 310 453 2026 2789 211 50% 106 H1 100£ 7,600£ 801,800£ 11,300,000£ 4,023,000£ 1,152,000£ 2,106,000£

Truro and Roseland CNA residual 800 1500 900 277 287 564 336 50% 168 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,276,800£ -£ -£ -£ -£

St Agnes and Perranporth CNA 1100 1500 1100 179 311 490 610 40% 366 H2 40£ 3,040£ 1,112,640£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Newquay 3000 1900 3550 481 1536 2017 1533 40% 920 H1 100£ 7,600£ 6,990,480£ -£ 1,618,000£ 2,521,000£ 1,293,000£

Newquay and St Columb CNA residual 600 600 600 39 174 213 387 40% 232 H2 40£ 3,040£ 705,888£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Eco-Community 2300 2300 2300 0 0 0 2300 50% 1150 H3 -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£

St Austell 1700 1900 2000 584 1050 126 1760 240 40% 144 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,094,400£ 205,000£ 299,000£ -£ -£

St Austell CNA residual 300 600 300 42 87 129 171 40% 103 H1 100£ 7,600£ 779,760£ -£ -£ -£ -£

St Blazey, Fowey and Lostwithiel CNA 800 1500 800 154 287 441 359 50% 180 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,364,200£ -£ -£ -£ -£

China Clay CNA 1400 2000 1500 461 583 1044 456 40% 274 H3 -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Wadebridge 800 700 1000 65 226 291 709 40% 425 H2 40£ 3,040£ 1,293,216£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Wadebridge and Padstow CNA residual 900 1500 1000 239 256 495 505 50% 253 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,919,000£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Bodmin 3000 1100 3000 212 653 865 2135 40% 1281 H2 40£ 3,040£ 3,894,240£ -£ 2,840,000£ 100,000£ 116,000£

Bodmin CNA residual 200 300 200 25 25 50 150 50% 75 H1 100£ 7,600£ 570,000£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Camelford CNA 900 1100 1200 207 179 386 814 40% 488 H2 40£ 3,040£ 1,484,736£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Bude-Stratton-Poughill 800 900 900 72 482 554 346 40% 208 H2 40£ 3,040£ 631,104£ -£ 242,000£ -£ 386,000£

Bude CNA residual 450 600 600 70 116 186 414 40% 248 H1 100£ 7,600£ 1,887,840£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Launceston 1100 700 1500 251 462 275 988 512 40% 307 H2 40£ 3,040£ 933,888£ 50,000£ 219,000£ -£ 15,000£

Launceston CNA residual 400 800 400 107 150 257 143 40% 86 H2 40£ 3,040£ 260,832£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Liskeard 1000 800 1250 150 213 450 813 437 40% 262 H3 -£ -£ -£ 123,000£ 50,000£ -£ 275,000£

Liskeard and Looe CNA residual 1000 2000 1400 231 437 668 732 40% 439 H3 -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Caradon CNA 1000 1400 1000 167 329 496 504 40% 302 H1 100£ 7,600£ 2,298,240£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Saltash 750 1300 1000 121 44 165 835 40% 501 H2 40£ 3,040£ 1,523,040£ 76,000£ 115,000£ 1,540,000£ 165,000£

Torpoint 300 700 350 0 10 10 340 40% 204 H2 40£ 3,040£ 620,160£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Cornwall Gateway CNA residual 250 700 350 45 50 95 255 40% 153 H2 40£ 3,040£ 465,120£ -£ -£ -£ -£

Strategic - - - - - - - - - - - - - -£ 8,900,000£ -£ -£ -£

TOTAL: 42250 47300 47500 6714 15520 3177 25411 22089 12830 46,343,584£ 39,505,000£ 15,123,793£ 33,286,000£ 8,383,200£

Draft CIL Contributions (£/sqm) Assumed %age of CIL likely to used for transport = 33%

Housing Zone H1 100£ Total CIL funds available for transport = 15,293,383£ Total Secured Funds = 96,297,993£

Zone H2 40£

Zone H3 -£ Total Funds (Transport CIL + Secured) = 111,591,376£

Employment -£ Total cost of transport improvement works across Cornwall = 210,366,458£

Taken from Community Infrastructure Levy Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule Funding shortfall = 98,775,082£

* Zones vary accross CNAs, choice based on dominant zone type from maps

** Average new build house size taken from RIBA report "The Case for Space" page 12

TOTAL CIL FUNDS =

Calculation of Potential CIL Funds Other Secured Funding Sources

Co

mm

un

ity

Ne

two

rk i

ncl

ud

ing

su

bd

ivis

ion

to

ma

in t

ow

ns

Pre

-su

bm

issi

on

dra

ft t

arg

et

pu

bli

she

d C

C

ap

pro

ve

d a

nd

pu

bli

she

d f

or

con

sult

ati

on

Sp

rin

g

20

13

Dis

trib

uti

on

on

a s

imp

le p

ro r

ata

ba

sis

of

the

targ

et

at

47

,50

0

PA

C’s

Pro

po

sed

dis

trib

uti

on

of

47

,50

0

Nu

mb

er

of

dw

ell

ing

s co

mp

lete

d s

ince

th

e s

tart

of

the

pla

n p

eri

od

; 2

01

0-1

3

Appendix B CAT Output and Appraisal Summary Table

Why is the Project Needed?

What are the Positive and Negative Impacts of the Project?

What is the Scale of the Impact?

Degree of Consensus Over Outcomes

Does the Project Align with National Policy Objectives?

Scheme Prioritisation Summary

Scheme Summary

Project name Cornwall Bus Network

Project Type Bus

Promoter Lesley Barlow Reviewer

Brief Scheme Description

Travelling by bus in Cornwall is often a mode of

travel of last resort. Many vehicles in have been

cascaded to Cornwall from other operating

areas and the quality needs improving. With

rising motoring costs in terms of fuel and

insurance, etc. we need to ensure that the

public has a viable alternative to the private car.

Infrastructure and information require

improvement and advances in technology allow

much more information to become available

throughout the entire journey to give

confidence in the network and in making

connections. Fare levels are high and rising and

2016Project Time Scale Construction Start Year 2014

Strategic Case

Opening Year

To deliver a step change in public transport infrastructure and vehicles for Cornwall by creating the

infrastructure to support a high quality bus network in the key towns within Cornwall and upgrading the bus

fleet.

Cornwall

e.g. Use this section to record any non-monetised benefits e.g. Journey Ambience, Helath and Well-Being,

Landscape Impact, Biodiversity, Wider Economic Benefits

Supported by Officers

Creating growth, cutting carbon: making sustainable local transport happen

Imagery, Google Earth (Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO, Landsat, © 2013 Google) 2014

Page 1 of 5

No of New Houses Facilitated by Project

No of New Jobs Facilitated by Project ## ## 73

Gross Value Added (GVA)

3

3

3

-1

0

-1

-1

0

0

0

0

2

1

2

13

Monetised Benefit (PVB) BCR 51

##


Economic Case

LTP Goals Score

1 Reducing Reliance on Fossil Fuels -1.0 3.0

Objective Actual Risk

2 Local Living -2.0 4.0

8 Minimising Natural Resources and Waste 3.0 5.0

3 Resilience to Climate Change 0.0 4.0

4 Impact of Journey Times 9.0 4.0

5 Resilient and Reliable Transport System 9.0 4.0

9 Providing Sustainable Access to the Environment 9.0 4.010 Improving the Health of Communites through Active Travel 0.0 5.0

7 Protecting the Environment -0.8 5.0

6 Integrity of Town Centres and Rural Communities 9.0 4.0

11 Increases Awareness of Health Benefits through Active Travel 6.0 5.0

12 Improving Road Safety 2.0 5.0

13 Public Confidence in a Safe Transport Network 1.3 4.0

14 Reduce Noise and Air Quality Impacts -1.0 4.0

69

Summary of ASTEconomic

15 Improving Access to Facilities 0.0 3.0

17 Encouraging Community Participation 2.0 3.0

16 Improving Access to Public Transport 6.0 3.0

280

909

32.42

CAT Rating 52

Environmental

Transport benefits

Regeneration and Wider Economic Effect

Large Beneficial Impact



Reliability impact

Noise Slight Adverse Impact

Greenhouse gases

Air Quality Neutral Impact

Slight Adverse Impact

Heritage of Historic resources

Biodiversity

Water Environment

Landscape and Townscape Slight Adverse

Neutral Impact

Neutral Impact

Neutral Impact

Social

Physical activity

Accidents

Neutral Impact

Moderate Beneficial Impact

Security

Access to services

Measures of Economic Benefit1.38

Moderate Beneficial Impact

Slight Beneficial Impact

TBC

Page 2 of 5

Consultation Undertaken/Required with the following


Management Case

Statutory Approvals Required and/or Completed Yes

Have Utilities Been Considered? No

3rd Party Land Yes

Level of Utility Consideration N/A

How will the Project be Procured and Constructed?

Revenue funding pressures (Likely Major)

Evidence based work has been completed as part of the Town Framework transport strategy development.

Assessment of the Cornwall bus network is ongoing.

Cornwall Bus Vision Implementation Plan Technical Note 1-3 - documents.

Connecting Cornwall 2030 Bus Vision - document

ITP - Investigation of alternative delivery models of public transport in Cornwall - document

Failure to obtain planning approvals (Unlikely Minor)

What are the Key Risks to Delivery of the Project?

State aid (Unlikely Minor)

Early stages of project development (Likely Moderate)

Failure to obtain operator support (Possible Moderate)

Overal Risk Score 45

Public, PT Operators, Disability Cornwall, Parish/Town Councils

Project Stage Status Implementation Timescale

Project Initiation Complete

Statutory Powers Underway 01/12/2013

Feasibility Complete 01/03/2013

Option Selection Underway 01/08/2013

Contractor Procurement and Mobilisation Not Started 01/11/2014

Detailed Design Not Started

Preliminary/Outline Design Underway 01/09/2013

01/01/2016

Project Close Not Started 01/03/2016

Construction and Commissioning Not Started

01/07/2014

Page 3 of 5

Cost Profile - Annual Spend

Central Government Funding Other Funding

Cornwall Council Funding Capital Cost (PVC)

Convergence Funding Revenue Cost

Section 106 Funding Funding Deadline

Type Total

Capital (Works) Cost

On-going revenue costs

Non-Direct Costs

Compensation CostsLand Costs

Design Costs

Other Costs (Specify)Other Costs (Specify)

Strategic Case (Subjective) 1

Economic Case 2

Management Case 2

1

1 *Strategic, Commercial and Financial Cases Subjectively Rated by Reviewer 7


Commercial Case

Likely Funding Sources and Earliest Funding Deadline

£8,375,000

Is the Project Affordable and Financially Sustainable?

£2,000,000 £10,375,000

The project's affordability is dependant on scheme funding being secured.

£0 £0

£0 01/03/2019

Financial CaseApr 2018 - Mar 2019Apr 2015 - Mar 2016 Apr 2016 - Mar 2017 Apr 2017 - Mar 2018

£0 £0

£0 £0 £0 £0

£0 £6,518,000 £3,238,000

£0 £258,000 £0

Overall

£0

£0 £9,756,000

£0

£0

£0 £0 £0 £0 £0

£0

£119,000 £242,000 £0 £0 £361,000

£0 £0 £0 £0 £0£0 £0 £0 £0 £0

£0 £258,000

Green

Amber

Amber

AmberCommercial and Financial Case

(Subjective)

Page 4 of 5

Framework Appraisal Summary Table

Name Lesley

Barlow

OrganisationFrom

Gateway

Role From

Gateway

25100

8366.666667

Does the

scheme

provide

sustainable

access:

8323

Noise Impact on

absolute

disturbance

from noise:

Adverse Magnitude of

effect:Slight Scheme in

DEFRA Noise

Action Plan

Area?

1

Air Quality Impact on Air

Quality:

Neutral Magnitude of

effect:

Scheme in

AQMA?

FALSE

Landscape

and

Townscape

Heritage of

Historic

resources

Biodiversity

Water

Environment

191

Security

Employment

AccessModerate

Beneficial

Impact

Education

Access

Moderate

Beneficial

Impact

Leisure

Access

Moderate

Beneficial

Impact

Healthcare

Access

Moderate

Beneficial

Impact

Affordability Project Cost Secured

Funds

#REF! Acceptability Supported by

Officers

Severance Project effect

on supporting

communities

to live locally:

Adverse Magnitude of

effect:

Slight

Access to

services

Increase access to key services by improved bus provision and frequency for 140'000

peoploe in rural areas and an additional 14'000 in small towns and 48'000 in larger towns.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Change in

overall

traffic/distanc

Lower Increase in

net CO2

emissions:

No

N/A

Greenhouse

gases

Additional buses in town perceived as a detrimental impact on the townscape due to

noise/AQ perception.

No perceived effect on water quality.

No perceived effect on Biodiversity.

No perceived effect on Heritage.

N/A

No Impact

So

cia

l

Physical

Activity

Does the

project

improve

Not

Applicable

Will the

project

provide

Not

Applicable N/A Neutral Impact

Accidents Impact of

project on

numbers of

Reduce Effect of

project on risk

of travel:

Reduce No of KSI accidents in scheme area within last 5 years Moderate Beneficial Impact

85th %ile Speeds

En

vir

on

me

nta

l

N/A Slight Adverse Impact

N/A Neutral Impact

Ec

on

om

y Transport

benefits

Impact of the

project on

journey time

on the SRN /

Mainline Rail /

Flights to

Reduce Impact on the

monetary cost

of travel:

Reduce

DfT Carbon Calculator ResultSlight Adverse Impact

Embodied Carbon Rating

Regeneration

and Wider

Economic

Effect

Reliability

impact

Net effect on

overall cost of

travel:

Reduce

Value of journey time benefits (£) ###########


Project

Purpose:

Network

Improvement

or Expansion

Project effect

on access to

town centres /

Better Effect on

project's

ability to

Effect of

project on day

to day

Impact of

project on

number of


Number of new indirect jobs from housing

Number of new jobs facilitated

N/A

BCR

Better Number of new houses facilitated

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

Shelters better designed to provide greater visibility and reducee effects of vandalism.

Improved quality of travelling environment should reduce the level of crime and antisocial N/A Slight Beneficial Impact

Slight Adverse

N/A No Impact

N/A No Impact

Expected

impact on

CO2 intensity

No Change or

Insignificant

Reduce

N/A Large Beneficial Impact

Impacts Summary of key impacts Assessment

Quantitative Qualitative Monetary

£(NPV)

Date produced: 12/07/2013 Contact:

Name of scheme: Cornwall Bus Network

Description of scheme: Travelling by bus in Cornwall is often a mode of travel of last resort. Many vehicles in have been cascaded to Cornwall from other operating areas and the quality needs improving. With rising motoring costs in terms of fuel and insurance, etc. we need to ensure that the public has a viable alternative to the private car. Infrastructure and information require improvement and advances in technology allow much more information to become available throughout the entire journey to give confidence in the network and in making connections. Fare levels are high and rising and do little to entice the public from their cars. Existing governance arrangements in England do not allow for the LA to design and control the network, as happens, for example in London. Much has been cut from the network in recent times and lower levels of service are being experienced. We need to encourage more people onto buses to reduce congestion and in the long term reduce the subsidy required in the network, allowing a quality network

Appendix C Evidence of Delivery

REPORT 13 – DELIVERY CAPABILITY STATEMENT

C:\Users\ben.smith-laing\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\KLRE4O0V\Report 13 Delivery Capability Finalv2.doc

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

Strategic Economic Plan

Growth Deal Infrastructure Project Delivery Deliverability Capability Statement

Document Ref: SEP- DCS Rev 1.0

Prepared by

Transportation Service

Environment Directorate Cornwall Council

County Hall, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 3AY

Issue and Revision Record

Revision Date Originator Purpose of Issue/Nature of Change

0 5 Mar 2014 P J Swain Draft for comment

1.0 25 Mar 2014 P J Swain For Issue

This document has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof and should not be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authority of Cornwall Council being obtained. Cornwall Council accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned. Any person using or relying on the document for such other purposes agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm his agreement to indemnify Cornwall Council for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Cornwall Council accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned.


Contents

Deliverability Capability Statement 1.0 Purpose of Document 2.0 Delivery Capability Summary

3.0 Chiverton Cross Roundabout, A30 trunk road

4.0 Camborne-Pool-Redruth Regeneration Projects

5.0 Tamar Bridge Strengthening and Widening

6.0 A30 Temple to Higher Carblake

7.0 Falmouth Branch Line Rail Passing Loop - Penryn Station

8.0 Probus to Burngullow Mainline dualling

9.0 Coosebean Greenway, Truro

10.0 Conclusion

Appendix 1 – Capabilities of CORMAC Solutions Ltd and

CORMAC Contracting Ltd


1. Purpose of Document

1.1. This document has been developed in order to provide assurance to the

Departments for Business Innovation and Skills, and Communities and Local Government, regarding the capability of the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Enterprise Partnership to deliver a programme of projects under the Growth Deal Initiative through Cornwall Council

2. Delivery Capability Summary

2.1. Cornwall Council has a record of delivery of a wide range of major projects working with internal and external stakeholders over many years. Under the Corporate Director of Environment, the authority has a client based commissioning unit, the Transportation Service, which takes overall responsibility for scheme delivery and leads the development of bids and partnership working with stakeholders. The unit commissions project management, preparation, design, and construction of projects through a number of providers, both in-house and external.

2.2. The Council runs an in-house Arm’s Length Company, Cormac Solutions,

which undertakes project management roles to provide scheme preparation and development, with Project Managers reporting to Project Boards under PRINCE2 procedures and processes. Project Executive and SRO roles are held by staff from the Transportation Service, and representatives from key stakeholders hold senior user roles on Project Boards. These Governance arrangements are separately described in ‘Report 14 – Project Governance’.

2.3. Cormac Solutions is in a strong position to provide project design and preparation services with an experienced team used to undertaking such work. In addition Cormac Solutions has an existing contract in place with consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff to provide assistance for the full range of transportation related project consultancy services including feasibility studies, traffic modelling, project management services, design and contract preparation, economic studies, and environmental studies. Parsons Brinckerhoff is a nationally and internationally recognised consultant with a large pool of resources that can be called upon if required. The existing term contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff was awarded in 2013 and runs to 2017.

2.4. The Council’s established Democratic and Legal Services department is well

acquainted with the necessary procedures to deliver legal agreements in a timely fashion to enable fast tracked projects to be delivered efficiently, and its Estates Management section undertakes valuation services to enable speedy agreement of land and compensation assessments.

2.5. Cormac Solutions Ltd is established as a ‘Teckal Exempt’ organisation so

construction work can be passported directly to them for projects under the EU tendering Threshold. Such work is carried out under a term contract with Cormac Solutions at rates that have been competitively tendered for and market tested.

2.6. Alternatively, the Council takes schemes through full EU compliant tender

processes and another council owned company, Cormac Contracting Ltd, has a strong track record in submitting competitive tenders and achieving


successful delivery through this procedure. A detailed assessment of the capabilities of Cormac Solutions Ltd and Cormac Contracting Ltd is provided at Appendix 1.

2.7. The Council has recently awarded a Framework Contract for Major Capital

Projects for works up to £50m in value. Hence the Council is able to award major projects to a framework panel contractor following a mini-tender exercise which cuts down the procurement timescales and costs for such works. There is no need to go though EU PIN Notice and short listing procedures as these have already been completed in setting up the framework.

2.8. However, if necessary, the Council is also experienced in taking projects

through the full OJEU contract procedures if this is deemed necessary.

2.9. The Council runs a Procurement Assurance Service staffed by independent

officers, to provide assurance and guidance that proper contract procedures are followed and best value is obtained.

2.10. Cornwall Council is particularly experienced in delivering transportation projects in partnership with external stakeholders to constrained time and cost limits. Partnerships have been forged with the Highways Agency, Network Rail and First Great Western, Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust, Sustrans, the Tamar Bridge and Torpoint Ferry Joint Committee, Newquay Cornwall Airport, and the Isles of Scilly Council to develop and deliver projects across all modes of transport – road, rail, sea, and air.

2.11. The following are some recent examples of such partnership working::

3. Chiverton Cross Roundabout, A30 trunk road

3.1. The Chiverton Cross roundabout is located on the A30 Trunk Road northwest of Truro at a junction with the A390, A3075, and B3277 county routes. It was regularly the site of extensive queues causing delays and poor journey time reliability, especially during the morning and afternoon peak periods. The junction was considered to be a constraint on economic growth and development in mid and west Cornwall, not least in the regeneration area of Camborne-Pool-Redruth where 6000 homes and 6000 new jobs were planned to address economic decline. Lack of capacity was holding up approvals for development projects.

3.2. Although this junction lies on the trunk road, in 2009 Cornwall Council took

the opportunity to develop a scheme to improve the junction by working in partnership with the Highways Agency, and to seek a funding contribution from the Government’s Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF)

3.3. Cornwall Council developed the models and layouts, with the support of the

Highways Agency, and was successful in a bid to the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) of £3.85m to deliver the scheme. Part of the conditions of the CIF programme was that schemes had to be completed on the ground by the end of March 2011. Bearing in mind that the scheme


development was not commenced until 2009 this was a tight timeframe to prepare, procure, and deliver the scheme along with all the necessary third party approvals necessary.

3.4. The scheme was developed and delivered by the council’s in house design

team and constructed by the Council’s in house contractor, CORMAC. Involving the addition of an additional circulatory lane, additional approach and departure lanes on the A30 legs, and the combining of two northern legs into a single access, the scheme was opened to traffic in February 2011, 4 weeks ahead of the deadline and delivered to budget.

3.5. Post opening studies have shown that the scheme has been successful in

addressing the levels of congestion and bringing relief and time savings to travellers. Collision frequency, type and severity are shown to be typical of this form of junction and show that capacity improvements have been achieved without compromising safety for users.

3.6. The scheme required the Council to work very closely with the Highways

Agency and the funders (through the Homes and Community Agency) as well as local residents, businesses, and travellers.

4. Camborne-Pool-Redruth Regeneration Projects 4.1. The Camborne-Pool-Redruth area of Cornwall suffers from a poor economy

and widespread deprivation due to the collapse of the tin mining industry and its supply chain in the 20th century. Since 2003 a regeneration plan has been developed and partially implemented by various agencies working in partnership. Cornwall Council has worked with the regeneration partners and agencies including the Camborne-Pool-Redruth Regeneration Company, the District Council, the Highways Agency, the Regional Development Agency, and the Homes and Communities Agency, to deliver a number of important projects in the area.

4.2. This has included acting as Project Sponsor and accountable body, securing

finance from central government, the European Regional Development Fund, Growth Point, and regeneration partners. Cornwall Council has managed the delivery of schemes to support the economic regeneration and enable housing and employment space development to progress. Much of this work has been achieved by making use of the Council’s internal expertise to design, procure, and build highway infrastructure projects to unlock development. In other cases the Council has employed its strategic design consultant partner, Parsons Brinckerhoff, and employed contractor Carillion on an Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) contract. Projects delivered include:

Project Value Current Status

Key Project Partners with Cornwall Council

CPR East West Link Road

£27m Under Construction

DfT – Major Scheme Funding ERDF – Convergence funding CPR Regeneration Partners


Tolvaddon Business Park Spine Road

£3.8m Completed 2012/13

ERDF – Convergence Funding RDA – Funding partner HCA – Development Promoter Highways Agency - A30 junction

Trevenson Park South

£4.7m Completed spring 2012

ERDF – Convergence Funding HCA – Development Promoter Heartlands Project - stakeholder

East Hill Junction and A30 link

£5.3m Completed Spring 2010

HCA – forward funder and development promoter, Land and associated consents Highways Agency – A30 junction interface CPR Partners – multi-Agency approach

Barncoose Link Road

£3.6m Completed Spring 2008

ERDF – Objective 1 Funding Kerrier District Council

5. Tamar Bridge Strengthening and Widening

5.1. The Tamar Bridge is a private estuarial toll road crossing between Devon

and Cornwall spanning the river Tamar. Comprising a 4 lane tidal flow single carriageway suspension bridge, the structure is managed by the Tamar Bridge and Torpoint Ferry Joint Committee which draws its membership from both Cornwall Council and Plymouth City Council. Cornwall Council provides the structural expertise to the Joint Committee and manages works of improvement, repair and maintenance.

5.2. In 1998 Cornwall County Council and Plymouth City Council worked together to develop and implement a scheme to widen the structure, which at that time carried a single 3 lane carriageway, to cope with increasing traffic demand and to strengthen the structure to meet modern loading requirements.

5.3. The works to widen the structure required a private bill to be developed and taken through Parliament which became the Tamar Bridge Act 1998.

5.4. The chosen solution was to provide additional cable stays to supplement the existing suspension cables, to remove the existing concrete deck and replace this with a composite steel deck, and to add cantilevers on both


sides of the structure to accommodate additional traffic lanes.

5.5. This required the Council to commission and work with specialist bridge design consultants, and to develop and procure a contract with a specialist contractor using the NEC suite of contracts with a target cost and pain/gain clauses.

5.6. With a project cost of £35m, the works were undertaken over an 22 month period between 1999 and 2001 whilst the bridge remained open to traffic. The scheme was funded from generated toll revenue and council borrowing.

6. A30 Temple to Higher Carblake

6.1. The single carriageway section of the A30 trunk road at Temple, on Bodmin

Moor, is a key constraint on this important route from the M5 to the south west. The Highways Agency had prepared a scheme to improve the length to dual carriageway standards, estimated to cost some £130m, but due to road programme cutbacks the scheme was removed from the Highways Agency programme in 2006.

6.2. Recognising the importance of the scheme to the Cornish economy, Cornwall Council entered into dialogue with the Highways Agency and the Government and offered to deliver the scheme on behalf of the Highways Agency and to partially fund the project. A rigorous assessment of the scheme by the Council led to an alternative alignment proposal and project scope amendment that could provide a scheme at an estimated cost of £60m. As a consequence, in 2010 the Government asked the Council to develop the proposals further. This resulted in funding contributions of £30m being allocated to the scheme by the Department for Transport with the remaining funds being raised locally by Cornwall Council, including through bids for convergence funding from the ERDF.

6.3. Cornwall Council is working in close partnership with the Department for Transport, Highways Agency, and local stakeholders to deliver the project on site in 2015. A public examination of the proposals under the National Significant Infrastructure Project procedures is underway with completion scheduled for the summer of 2014, and construction is expected to commence in spring 2015. Construction completion is programmed for late 2016.

6.4. To secure funding and deliver a scheme of this complexity, on a network managed by the Highways Agency, and achieve works start within just 5 years will be a major success story and a clear demonstration of the Council’s ability to manage major, multi agency projects.

7. Falmouth Branch Line Rail Passing Loop- Penryn Station

7.1. The Truro to Falmouth branch line, the Maritime Branch, connects the Port of Falmouth with Truro, the administrative centre of Cornwall. It generally comprised a single track line which restricted the frequency of services able to use the route. Recognising this as a constraint on both the accessibility of Falmouth and also the consequential reliability on car transport between Truro and Falmouth, especially for commuters, Cornwall Council worked in


partnership with Network Rail to develop a proposal for a passing loop at Penryn Station. The project benefited from the contribution of £4.67m ERDF Convergence funding support.

7.2. The completion of the passing loop at Penryn Station has enabled the

frequency of trains on the Maritime Branch line to become a half hourly service. The provision of an additional carriage has also supported the rise in passenger numbers 63.4% between 2009 and 2012. Passenger numbers are now in the excess of 600,000 per year which is significantly higher than the pre-scheme figures of 260,000 per year. This scheme involved multiple-agency working between Cornwall Council, Network Rail and First Great Western resulting in the project being delivered on time and within budget. The Maritime Branch service is fully commercial and has witnessed amongst the highest rate of growth in passengers numbers across the country.

8. Probus to Burngullow Mainline dualling

8.1. Through the Objective One Connecting Cornwall Transport Taskforce (a

partnership of private and public bodies with an interest in improving communications in Cornwall and established in 2000), improvements to the mainline railway between Truro and St Austell were identified as a priority. A £14m scheme to restore 7.5miles of double track was developed in order to

remove a single track bottleneck which caused train delays across the south west rail network and limited the frequency of services .

8.2. Without the championing of the scheme by Cornwall County Council, it is unlikely that the project would have progressed at that time. CCC led the bid to secure funding and commitments from other partners including the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), Network Rail, the Objective One Programme for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, and Government Office for the South West, and train operators Wessex Trains, First Great Western and Virgin Cross Country.

8.3. The scheme was completed in late 2004. Upon completion of the scheme,

David Quarmby, Chairman of the Strategic Rail Authority, said: "This project shows that when the rail industry and regional bodies get their heads together, we can find ways of making significant improvements for passengers, in a short timeframe, and within a sensible budget. This is a true success story for the West Country".

8.4. Cornwall Council was the accountable body and commissioning authority through back to back agreements with the SRA and Network Rail and delivery contractors. The project involved close co-operation and partnership working at all levels from boardroom to workface and with the funders Objective One and the Rail Passenger Partnership Programme.

9. Coosebean Greenway, Truro 9.1. The Coosebean Greenway is a cycle and pedestrian commuter link within

Truro, approximately 1.3km in length and providing an off road route linking St George's Road with Coosebean Lane, Malabar Road and Treliske Lane. It gives cyclists a safe alternative to using the busy A390 to the west of the city, and provides pedestrians with a scenic walk through the countryside behind


Malabar. The path also links with Malabar Road giving nearby residents off-road access to the city centre including existing and proposed employment and retail space.

9.2. Costing around £930,000, the project received funding support from Cornwall Council’s Local Transport Plan, the European Regional Development Fund, Growth Point Funding, and the Department for Transport’s Linking Communities fund, administered by Sustrans.

9.3. The works were procured through an open tendering process and constructed by Cormac Contracting Ltd in 2012.

9.4. Project management and delivery of the project required extensive consultation and partnership working with many stakeholders, including Sustrans, Environmental consultants, local resident groups, and the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust Bicycle Users Group. Partnership working with the funding bodies was also paramount in achieving a successful outcome.

9.5. The project represents a significant step towards providing a better environment and safer access for cyclists and pedestrians between Truro City Centre and areas where there is high demand for access to work and education. Reducing traffic congestion along the A390 Highertown corridor is contributing to carbon reduction and improved air quality.

10. Conclusion 10.1. As has been demonstrated above, the Council has a good track

record in developing fruitful relationships and working with partners to deliver projects within constrained limits – be they financial, time, or quality driven. The Council has the staff and resources to drive forward projects, and a pro-active approach to ensure successful outcomes. Whether working with national agencies such as Network Rail, the Highways Agency, and Train Operating Companies, funding bodies such as the Department for Transport, ERDF (through DCLG), and the Homes and Communities Agency, or with local stakeholders, the Council is in a strong position to ensure delivery on time and to budget.


Appendix 1

Capabilities of CORMAC Solutions and CORMAC Contracting Ltd CORMAC operate two companies which play separate roles in the delivery of highway and transportation infrastructure in Cornwall:

CORMAC Solutions Ltd (CSL) is a Cornwall Council owned company which operates under the Teckal exemption and delivers services to the Council through Value for Money assessment as opposed to market competition and testing. This provides great flexibility for the council, reduces procurement lead times and reduces client and contractual risks.

CORMAC Contracting Ltd (CCL) is also a Cornwall Council owned company which trades under S95 of the Local Government Act. This company was established with a commercial motive and to bid for both public and private sector contracts. CCL are currently approved on Lot 1 (<£1m projects) and Lot 2 (>£1m projects) of the Council’s Civil Engineering Capital Framework, which expires in January 2016.

CORMAC’s Contracting Business Division operates across both companies and a co-operation Agreement between the companies enables CSL to provide CCL with resources on a commercial basis. Across both companies the Contracting Business Division employs in the region of 90 multi skilled operatives and 60 management/supervisory, commercial and administrative staff. Recent investment in re-establishing our directly employed workforce has been made to counter the impacts of construction industry growth on our supply chain and to enable us to play an important role in providing the transportation infrastructure to enable economic development in Cornwall. Our directly employed teams are supported by:

a strategic partnership with Job Line recruitment agency, to recruit and provide temporary employees

a rationalised supply chain containing the specialist suppliers and subcontractors required for the construction of highway infrastructure, including key relationships with six locally based groundworks sub-contractors

CORMAC’s surfacing teams – in 2014-15 CORMAC will be operating a fleet of 5 paving machines

Supply of aggregates and asphalt from our quarry in west Cornwall

Access to a further 300 operatives form within CORMAC’s Highways & Environment Business Division

The Contacting Business Division maintains a detailed projects pipeline for 2014/15 and 2015/16+, which helps us to track future opportunities for both CCL and CSL and to assist us in making informed resourcing, partnership and supply chain development decisions. We have identified the SEP as an important source of information when establishing our pipeline and have identified amongst others:

Local Development Projects including Truro, Bodmin, Falmouth and Newquay Transport Packages including various developer funded infrastructure elements


Rail Projects including WCTI

Strategic Highway Projects such as A30 Temple and A30 St Erth and A38 Carkeel, and A30 Carland to Chiverton

Infrastructure required for the development of Bus networks and services A key business focus is for CORMAC (whether operating as CSL or CCL) is to develop a high quality Design and Construction offering for either two stage or single stage procurement. This can provide clients with added value through a contractor led design including reduced design fees and higher levels of price certainty. With the contractor taking the risk for the design contract administration can be leaner for clients who don’t have designer/contractor interfaces to manage. Enablers for this includes identification/development/recruitment of suitable Project Managers, staff engagement and development of a cohesive team culture across CORMAC’s internal design and construction teams, identification of design partners to provide specialist service and the expectation that the Council will let more contracts on a Design and Construct basis. In summary, the use of the in-house companies, where possible, has strengthened Cornwall Council’s ability to deliver infrastructure projects economically and efficiently providing best value for clients and funders alike. It has strengthened the confidence of major clients, such as the DfT and Highways Agency, in CORMAC’s ability to work in partnership with shared goals and ambitions and focussed delivery.

Appendix D Project Governance

REPORT 14

C:\Users\ben.smith-laing\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\KLRE4O0V\Report 14 Project GovernancePGSRR FinalV2.doc 01.05.2008

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

Strategic Economic Plan

Growth Deal Infrastructure Project Delivery Project Governance Structure and Roles and Responsibilities Document Ref: SEP- PGSRR Rev Final

Prepared by

Transportation Service Environment Directorate

Cornwall Council County Hall, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 3AY

Issue and Revision Record

Revision Date Originator Purpose of Issue/Nature of Change

0 18 Feb 2014 P J Swain Draft for comment

Final 24 Mar 2014 P J Swain For Issue

This document has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof and should not be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authority of Cornwall Council being obtained. Cornwall Council accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned. Any person using or relying on the document for such other purposes agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm his agreement to indemnify Cornwall Council for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Cornwall Council accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned.

Report 14: GROWTH DEAL INFRASTRUCTURE: Project Governance

C:\Users\ben.smith-laing\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\KLRE4O0V\Report 14 Project GovernancePGSRR FinalV2.doc Page 1

Contents

Project Governance Structure and Roles and Responsibilities 1.0 Purpose of Document 2.0 Reconciliation of PRINCE2 Roles and Responsibilities 3.0 Project Governance Structure 4.0 LEP/Cornwall Council SEP Corporate Programme Board Team Roles 5.0 Project Management Team Roles APPENDIX 1 - Template for Project Specific Role Allocation



Project Governance Structure and Roles and Responsibilities

1.0 Purpose of Document

The purpose of this document is to define the roles and responsibilities of the Corporate (LEP)

and Project Management organisations. The content of the roles and responsibilities only relates

to this specific major capital project. The Corporate and Project Management Organisations

relate to the programme of Highway Infrastructure Projects being delivered by the Cornwall and

Isles of Scilly Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP)

2.0 Reconciliation of PRINCE2 Roles and Responsibilities

Roles and responsibilities defined within this document have been developed from those

contained within the PRINCE2 Manual. However, for clarity of use within the LEP/ Cornwall

Council’s project environment, some roles have been renamed. These are summarised as

follows:

PRINCE2 Terminology CCC Terminology/Role

Senior Responsible Officer Director of Economy and Environment –

Cornwall Council – TBC

Executive Head of Capital Projects –Cornwall Council

(CC) : Alan Chapman

Senior User (s) (as required) Transport Strategy and Planning Manager

(CC) : Matt Sidney

Economic Development Representative

(CC) TBC

LEP/SEP Representative (LEP)

Senior Supplier (s) (1) Technical Services Manager (CC)

(Cormac Solutions) : Richard Taylor or

Engineering Design Manager (CC)

(Cormac Solutions): Phil Lee

(2) Contractor’s Area Manager or Director

(To be Appointed)

Project Manager Project Manager :Engineering Design

Manager – Phil Lee, or Senior Project

Manager (Cormac Solutions or external

consultant to be appointed) : TBC

(During construction supported by the



Construction Manager (Contractor’s

Agent))

Team Manager (s)

Design Team Manager: Various

Project Assurance – Project Management &

Technical

Technical Services Manager (CC) (Cormac

Solutions) : Richard Taylor

Project Assurance – Business Case LEP/SEP Representative; and

Transport Strategy and Planning Manager

(CC) : Matt Sidney



3.0 Project Governance Structure

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Strategic Economic Plan

Growth Deal Infrastructure Delivery

Project Governance Structure

(Appendix 1 provides a template to allocate roles on specific projects within the programme) LEP/CC SEP Corporate Management Individual Scheme Project Management Delivery

(Design) Team Manager (s)

Surveys Investigations and

environmental teams

Other Consultants (external or internal)

Project Board (Individuals named for example purposes only and will be project specific)

Exec and SU (1): Alan Chapman, Head of Capital Projects

SU(2): Transport Strategy and Planning Manager (CC) : Matt Sidney

SS(1) : Technical Services Manager (CC)(Cormac Solutions)– Richard Taylor

SS(2) : Contractors Area Manager/Director - TBC

Project Assurance: (Technical)Technical Services Manager (CC)(Cormac Solutions)– Richard Taylor; and (Business Case) :Transport Strategy and Planning Manager (CC) :

Matt Sidney plus LEP representative

Project Manager (Cormac Solutions or External consultant)

Overall LEP/CC SEP Corporate Board

Programme Board

Sponsoring Group of Senior Stakeholder Business Directors/Managers – SEP Partners

Senior Responsible Owner – Peter Marsh, Director of Economy and Environment (CC)

Programme Manager – Alan Chapman, Head of Capital Projects (CC)

Corporate Financial Manager and S151 Officer rep: To be nominated by Cath Robinson, S151 Officer, Cornwall Council

Programme support

Main Contractor

Contract Supervision

Design support and construction



4.0 LEP/Cornwall Council SEP Corporate Programme Board Team Roles

The following roles explain the normal roles and responsibilities of each member of the Corporate

Board.

4.1 Sponsoring Group

The Sponsoring Group is the overall driving force behind the programme of projects. It is the

group of senior representatives of the partnership responsible for the strategic direction of the

business, and ensuring alignment of the programme to deliver that direction.

4.2 Programme Board

The Programme Board brings together the key roles, processes and management structures of

the programme partners and stakeholders to deliver a programme’s desired outcome. It provides

the co-ordinated corporate management of a programme of projects to achieve benefits that are

of strategic importance.

4.2.1 Specific Responsibilities

The Programme Board provides an organisation structure and process definitions that:

Enable linkage between the top level strategic direction of the Sponsoring Group

organisations (approved by the stakeholders) and the management activities

required to achieve strategic objectives

Drives the programme of projects forward to deliver outcomes and benefits

Provide a mandate to the Project Boards for all projects

Ensures the goals of a project or programme of projects remain valid in response

to changes outside the project

Supports Project Boards who have to plan and control activities, set priorities and

allocate resources for implementation of groups of related projects

Ensures the impact of changes on the organisations and stakeholders involved is

managed and that the intended change is achieved in the optimum way

Helps to focus management attention clearly on the realisation of benefits that

are defined and understood at the outset and achieved throughout the lifetime of

the project and beyond.

4.3 Senior Responsible Owner (SRO):

The SRO is a single individual with overall responsibility for ensuring the programme meets its

objectives and delivers its projected benefits. It is likely the SRO will appoint Project Executives

for the projects within the programme.

4.4 Programme Manager:

Overall responsibility, leadership and authority for the day to day running and success of the

programme on behalf of the SRO is assigned to the Programme Manager.



4.5 Corporate Financial Manager:

The role of the Corporate Financial Manager is responsible for managing the overall

programme’s budget on behalf of the Corporate Director, monitoring the expenditures and costs

against delivered and realised benefits as the programme progresses.

4.6 Programme Support

Programme Support Officers may provide specialist professional support to the Programme

Board in such areas as Legal advice.

5.0 Project Management Team Roles

The following roles explain the normal responsibilities and tasks of each member of the Project

Management team(s) allocated to, and responsible for, the delivery of one or more projects within

the programme.

5.1 Project Board

The Project Board is responsible to the Corporate Board for the overall direction and

management of the project and has responsibility and authority for the project within the remit

(the Project Mandate) set by the Programme Board.

The Project Board is the project’s ‘voice’ to the outside world and is responsible for any publicity

or other dissemination of information about the project.


The Project Board approves all major plans and requests authorisation for any major

deviation from agreed Stage Plans from the Programme Board. It is the authority that

signs off the completion of each stage as well as providing authority to start the next

stage. It ensures that required resources are committed and arbitrates on any conflicts

within the project or negotiates a solution to any problems between the project and

external bodies. In addition, it approves the appointment and responsibilities of the

Project Manager.

The Project Board has responsibilities set down in the PRINCE2 Manual, including but

not limited to:

o approving the start of the project via acceptance of the Project Brief

o confirmation with Corporate Management of project tolerances

o specification of external constraints on the project, such as quality assurance

o approval of an accurate and satisfactory Project Brief, including that it

complies with relevant customer standards and policies

o provision of overall guidance and direction to the project, ensuring it remains

within any specified constraints

o review of Stage Plans and any Exception Plans



o requesting approval of Exception Plans causing major deviation from the

Stage Plan from the SRO/Programme Board

o compliance with Corporate management directives

o assurance that all Deliverables have been delivered satisfactorily

o assurance that all Project Objectives have been met

o approval of the End Project Report

o approval of the Post Project Review Report and the passage of this to the

appropriate group to ensure action

o project closure notification to Corporate management

The Project Board directs the project.

The Project Board is ultimately responsible for assurance that the project remains on

course to deliver the desired outcome of the required quality to meet the Business Case

defined in the Project Brief.

5.2 Executive

The Executive is ultimately responsible for the project, supported by the Senior User and Senior

Supplier. The Executive’s role is to ensure that the project is focused throughout its life cycle on

achieving its objectives and delivering a product that will achieve the projected benefits. The

Executive has to ensure that the project gives value for money, ensuring a cost-conscious

approach to the project, balancing the demands of business, user and supplier.

Throughout the project, the Executive ‘owns’ the Business Need.

5.2.1 Specific Responsibilities – These are set out in the PRINCE2 Manual and include but

are not limited to:

Oversee the development of the Project Brief and Business Need

Ensure that there is a coherent project organisation structure and logical set of

plans for the delivery of the project

Authorise stage expenditure and set stage tolerances

Monitor and control the progress of the project at a strategic level

Ensure that any proposed changes of scope, cost or timescale are checked

against their possible effects on the Business Need

Ensure that risks are being tracked and mitigated as effectively as possible

Chair Project Board meetings

Recommend future action on the project to the Programme Board if the project

tolerance is predicted to be exceeded

Approve the sending of the project closure notification to the Corporate Board

The Executive is responsible for overall business assurance of the project – that

is, that it remains on target to deliver outcomes that will achieve the expected business

benefits, and that the project will be completed within its agreed tolerances for budget

and schedule.



The Project Board is not a democracy controlled by votes. The Executive is the key

decision maker, seeking direction from the Programme Manager/SRO as

appropriate with advice and commitments from others.

5.3 Senior User(s)

A Senior User is responsible for the specification of the needs of all those who will use the final

product(s), for user liaison with the project team and for monitoring that the solution will meet

those needs within the constraints of the Business Case in terms of quality, functionality and ease

of use.

The role represents the interests of all those who will use the final product(s) of the project, those

for whom the product will achieve an objective or those who will use the product to deliver the

benefits. The Senior User role commits user resources and monitors products against

requirements. This role may require more than one person to cover all the user interests. For

the sake of effectiveness the role should not be split between too many people.

5.4 Senior Supplier(s)

Represents the interests of those designing, developing, facilitating, procuring and implementing

the project. A Senior Supplier is accountable for the quality of Deliverables produced by the

Design Consultant. A Senior Supplier role must have the authority to commit or acquire

resources required.


Select and appoint the Suppliers delivery Team(s)

Agree objectives for activities

Make sure that progress towards the outcome remains consistent from the

Supplier’s perspective

Ensure that the resources required for the project are made available

Contribute Supplier’s opinions on Project Board decisions on whether to

implement recommendations on proposed changes

Administer the delivery team contracts and resolve conflicts.

5.5 Project Manager:

The Project Manager has the authority to run the whole project on a day-to-day basis on behalf of

the Project Board within the constraints and tolerances laid down by the project board, in

accordance with the functions set down in the PRINCE2 Manual.

The Project Manager’s prime responsibility is to ensure that the project produces the required

products, to the required standard of quality and within the specified constraints of time and cost.

The Project Manager is also responsible for the project producing a result that is capable of

achieving the benefits defined in the Business Case.

5.6 Team Manager(s)



The Team Manager’s prime responsibility is to ensure production of those products defined by

the Project Manager to an appropriate quality, in a timescale and at a cost acceptable to the

Project Board. The Team Manager reports to and takes direction from the Project Manager.

5.7 Project Assurance

Project Assurance provides an independent view of how the project is progressing. There are

three views of assurance; business, user and supplier.

Assurance is about checking that the project remains viable in terms of costs and benefits

(business assurance), checking the user requirements are being met (user assurance) and that

the project is delivering a suitable solution (supplier assurance)

Given that each of the three views of assurance reflects the interest of the three principal Project

Board Members, Project Assurance will be undertaken the relevant Project Board member with

specific responsibilities identified with each role.

5.8 Project Support

The provision of any Project Support on a formal basis is optional at the discretion of the Project

Manager. Tasks need to be done by the Project Manager or delegated to a separate project

support entity, and this will be driven by the needs of the project and the Project Manager.

Project Support may be in the form of advice on project management tools, guidance,

administrative services such as filing, and the collection of actuals, to one or more related

projects. Where set up as an official body, Project support can act as a repository for lessons

learned and a central source of expertise in specialist support tools (e.g. programming).



APPENDIX 1

Template for Project Specific Role Allocation for inclusion in project documentation for specific projects in

the overall SEP Programme.

Role Allocated to:

Executive Client Manager

……………………………………………

Senior User (s) Client Manager and Stakeholder

Representative(s)

…………………………………………….

……………………………………………..

……………………………………………..

Senior Supplier (s) (1) Design Manager

………………………………………………

(2) Contractors Director

……………………………………………….

Project Manager Named Project Manager

………………………………………………

(During construction supported by the

Construction Manager (Contractor’s

Agent))

………………………………………………..

Team Manager (s)

Design Team Manager(s):

…………………………………………….

…………………………………………….

…………………………………………….

…………………………………………….

Project Assurance Business

……………………………………………..

User

……………………………………………..

Supplier

………………………………………………

cornwall and the isles of scilly strategic economic … economic...cornwall and the isles of scilly...

Documents