Regional Funding Allocations The Advice of the Northwest Region
January 2006
Regional Funding Allocations The Advice of the Northwest Region Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR THE NORTHWEST
2
1.1
Introduction including the Region’s Vision
2
1.2
Alignment of Economic Development, Housing and Transport Spending Plans to achieve the Region’s Priorities
1.3
3
How The Region Would Maximise the Impact of any Increase in Funding and Would Minimise the Impact of any Decrease
8
2.
TAKING THE RFA PROCESS FURTHER FORWARD
8
2.1
Introduction
8
2.2
Future Directions for the Northwest Region
9
2.3
Complementary Policy Considerations for central Government
9
3.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPENDING PRIORITIES
11
3.1
Key economic development issues and strategic priorities for the Northwest
11
3.2 Methodology for determining economic development priorities
12
3.3 Priority economic development interventions
13
4.
HOUSING SPENDING PRIORITIES
16
4.1
Key housing issues and strategic priorities for the Northwest
16
4.2 Methodology for determining housing priorities
17
4.3 Priority housing market interventions
17
5.
TRANSPORT SPENDING PRIORITIES
21
5.1
Key transport Issues and strategic priorities for the Northwest
21
5.2 Methodology for determining transport priorities
22
5.3 Priority transport interventions
23
6.
30
HOW THE ADVICE WAS PRODUCED
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We are delighted to submit the Regional Funding Allocations advice of the Northwest region to Government. The Northwest has recently reviewed its Regional Economic Strategy, Regional Housing Strategy and Regional Spatial Strategy. From these reviews the region is very clear about its vision and priorities. They are to: • Maximise the growth opportunities presented by the three cities of Manchester, Liverpool and Preston, as key drivers of city-regional growth • Fully develop growth opportunities around the key regional towns and cities of Crewe, Chester, Warrington, Lancaster and Carlisle • Regenerate East Lancashire, Blackpool, Barrow and West Cumbria • Ensure ongoing growth in the rural economy as part of the Regional Rural Delivery Framework There are three major brakes on the region’s ability to fulfil this economic and social development potential: • Weaknesses in the housing market – we need to address market failure as well as build more decent homes and sustainable communities • The effectiveness of key transport infrastructure – we need to improve the quality and provision of public transport and to improve and make the best use of the highway network • High levels of worklessness, and concentrations of low productivity and enterprise levels – we need to better link sustainable economic development opportunities to key groups and areas The region’s detailed spending priorities under RFA are included in the document. However we believe this advice represents a considerable step forward for the region and Government in that: 1. The RES identifies 45 Transformational actions, focused on improving productivity and tackling worklessness, many of which will be taken forward via RFA funding 2. The housing spending is focused on improving the stock and delivering appropriate affordable housing, in particular via support for HMR areas 3. For the first time the region has agreed its transport priorities, defining 25 new road schemes, within an agreed budget, with a further 4 contingency schemes 4. The economic development, housing and transport strategies and spending priorities are aligned. The RES, RHS and RSS prioritise HMR areas as the key spatial focus for tackling need, which aligns with the housing spending priorities. These strategies also sets out to maximise the potential of the Cities / City Regions, connect areas of opportunity and need, and encourage economic development in locations which better use the existing transport infrastructure - the same priorities which have driven transport decisions 5. The proposed RFA spending will generate substantial outputs, including 140,000 jobs (created or safeguarded), 22,000 new businesses, 180,000 people assisted in skills, 59,000 dwellings improved and 18,000 affordable houses completed
We are determined to ensure the best use of public expenditure in the region. We have therefore agreed to jointly monitor the progress in implementing all the schemes outlined in this advice. We also want to go further, with Government, in making decisions which affect this region and improve our economy. Specifically we want to talk to Government about: (a)
(b) (c)
The scope to include rail transport decisions within RFA – in this way the region will be giving advice to Government on the whole transport infrastructure, including road, rail, ports and airports The availability and use of European Structural Funds post 2006 – to ensure that they are aligned to our strategic priorities to maximise their effectiveness The unique challenges faced by West Cumbria – an economy which needs support via the West Cumbria Strategic Forum, chaired by the Secretary of State, DTI.
We commend the document to you, and look forward to receiving your views on our submission, and to working with you to develop England’s Northwest. We believe joint working is essential if we are to realise the region’s potential, deliver Northern Way ambitions, contribute fully to the Government’s PSA targets, and improve the quality of life for all in the region.
Bryan Gray Chairman Northwest Regional Development Agency
Peter Smith Chairman, Executive Board North West Regional Assembly
England’s Northwest Sub-Regions and City-Regions
Sub Regional Boundaries City Regions Central Lancashire
Manchester
Liverpool
Motorways Main Rail Routes
Source: Ordnance Survey, Crown Copyright 2005, All Rights Reserved, GD 021102
1
1.
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR THE NORTHWEST
1.1 Introduction The Northwest is home to 6.8 million people1 and is a £98 billion economy with 230,000 firms2. GVA per head is 12% lower than the England average, resulting in an output gap of £13 billion. It is a region of contrasts. It has two of the UK’s poorest performing sub regions (Merseyside – 5th lowest GVA - and Cumbria – 6th lowest) and five of the UK’s twenty slowest growing areas between 1996 and 2003. However, the region also contains one of the fastest growing areas in England and Wales (South Manchester) and one of the most prosperous (Cheshire). Overall growth has been above the England average for the last three years and the region is determined to maintain this record, achieve sustainable growth, share improved prosperity more widely in the region, and reduce the disparities within the Northwest and with the UK as a whole (in line with the Government’s REP PSA target). The region is clear that to achieve this vision we must compete on the basis of knowledge and advanced technology to: 1. Maximise the growth opportunities presented by the three cities of Manchester, Liverpool and Preston, as key drivers of city - regional growth3 2. Fully develop growth opportunities around the key regional towns and cities of Crewe, Chester, Warrington, Lancaster and Carlisle 3. Regenerate East Lancashire, Blackpool, Barrow and West Cumbria 4. Ensure ongoing growth in the rural economy as part of the Regional Rural Delivery Framework The Northwest contains excellent centres of learning, research and development; world-leading manufacturing industries, such as aerospace; excellent transport facilities including Manchester Airport, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Port of Liverpool; and a world beating environment that includes two world heritage sites and four areas of outstanding natural beauty. However, there are three major brakes on the region’s ability to fulfil its economic and social development potential: • weaknesses in the housing market – the region must address market failure as well as build more decent homes and sustainable communities. This will include refurbishment and clearance and ensuring an adequate supply of affordable housing to support the region’s planned economic development. The draft Regional Spatial Strategy proposes increasing the annual average rate of housing provision from 17-20,000 currently to 22,400. • ineffective key transport infrastructure – the region needs to significantly improve the quality / provision of public transport, and to improve and make best use of the highway network to maintain / improve connectivity internally, with other regions, and to link people with jobs. These are the key aims of the Regional Transport Strategy. • high levels of worklessness, near employment growth areas and in key groups, as well as concentrations of low productivity and enterprise levels – the region must better link sustainable economic development opportunities to concentrations of worklessness, as well as boost productivity and enterprise in key sectors and areas.
2
1
It is more populous than Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland as well as fourteen of the EU 25 member states
2
It is the largest contributor to the UK economy outside London and South East.
3
As the draft RSS states at para 2.3: “The Manchester City Region, home to the Northwest’s largest sub regional economy, represents the greatest potential for boosting economic performance in both the Northwest and the North of England as a whole, and for closing the gap that exists with regions in Southern England.”
The NWRA and NWDA as well as GONW have worked closely to develop a clear focus for understanding and addressing these three issues. This has included joint commissioning of research, shared representation on working groups and the use of shared evidence bases. The priorities and brakes on the economy outlined above have emerged from the revised RES, RHS and draft RSS. All of these strategies have been produced in the last few months following widespread consultation and joint working between regional and sub regional partners. Together these strategies represent a coherent view of future of the region. This document therefore provides a clear statement of how central Government funding for economic development, housing and transport can be most effectively spent in line with the vision and spatial priorities outlined above, as well as sustainable procurement principles4 . It sets out the region’s aspirations and the tough choices needed if the region is to succeed. This advice has been produced via joint work between a wide range of partners in the region, as well as a number of specific consultation exercises with over 30 organisations. It therefore represents an emerging commitment to partnership working to secure the best future for the Northwest.
1.2 Alignment of Economic Development, Housing and Transport Spending Plans to achieve the Region’s Priorities As requested the spending priorities on economic development, housing and transport are shown in detail in later sections. The table below shows, in summary form, how these spending priorities individually and collectively are aligned to support the agreed strategic regional priorities. It should be noted that this table only lists those actions which are funded via RFA that the region will pursue in relation to its four strategic priorities. Particularly in relation to Economic Development, there is a far wider range of actions that the region will pursue, outlined in the revised RES, funding for which is not embraced within the RFA process. In addition European Structural Funds after 2006 – both the overall amount and its use - are of great importance to all sub regions within the Northwest. The economic development priorities outlined below, and in the revised RES, have Housing Market Renewal areas as a key spatial priority for tackling need. In this way they align with the housing priorities, where HMR areas are the key spatial area for intervention. The key transport priorities below, and in the revised RES, are aimed at maximising the potential of the Cities / City Regions and connecting areas of opportunity and need. The economic development priorities deliver the same objectives as well as encouraging economic development in locations which better use the existing transport infrastructure.
4
The Government’s Sustainable Procurement Task Force’s draft definition of sustainable procurement is ‘a process whereby organisations meet their needs for goods, services, works and utilities in a way that achieves value for money on a whole life basis in terms of generating benefits to society and the economy, whilst minimising damage to the environment’.
3
MAXIMISE THE GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES PRESENTED BY THE THREE CITIES OF MANCHESTER, LIVERPOOL AND PRESTON, AS KEY DRIVERS OF CITY REGIONAL GROWTH Economic Development
Housing
Transport
Cluster programmes in priority sectors
Maximise the positive impact of the four Housing Renewal “Pathfinders” and emerging low demand initiatives within their broader housing markets in these city regions
Create better integrated transport networks within and between CityRegions
Exploiting opportunities from a Media Enterprise Zone linked to the BBC relocation Support Liverpool Capital of Culture 2008 to maximise the full economic benefit Supporting major research concentrations Delivering skills required to maximise the economic impact of key growth opportunities
Provide additional appropriate housing to support economic development (regeneration or knowledge economy) eg affordable housing for key workers The majority of new housing will be located in the three city regions – approximately 19,689 per annum new housing provision (net of clearance replacement) (set out in Draft RSS)
A556 (M6 to M56) Improvement Greater Manchester UTC Metrolink Extensions Bolton Town Centre Public Transport Strategy Leigh Salford Manchester QBC M60 JETTS QBC SEMMMS Relief Roads A34 Alderley Edge and Nether Alderley By-Pass
Encouraging employment creation in or near deprived areas
Access to Port of Liverpool Improvement Edge Lane / Eastern Approaches Liverpool Hall Lane Strategic Gateway Mersey Gateway Bidston Moss Viaduct (Maintenance) Thornton – Switch Island Link Silver Jubilee Bridge (Maintenance)
Setting Housing Market Renewal in a strong economic context
Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway Upgrade – Phase 1
Investment in quality public realm in the cities
East Lancashire Rapid Transit
Supporting people back into employment via employability and job brokerage activities
FULLY DEVELOP GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES AROUND KEY REGIONAL TOWNS AND CITIES OF CREWE, CHESTER, WARRINGTON, LANCASTER AND CARLISLE Economic Development
Housing
Transport
Cluster programmes in priority sectors
Ensure new housing supports regeneration or knowledge based sustainable economic development in these five important key regional towns and cities
Completion of Heysham to M6 Link
Helping businesses to implement process and product/service innovation Supporting major research concentrations Job brokerage linkages between these growth areas and workless people nearby
Average annual rate of housing provision (set out in Draft RSS) Crewe and Nantwich 450 Chester 417 Warrington 380 Lancaster 400 Carlisle 450
Carlisle Northern Development Route (committed scheme) Crewe Green Link Road Crewe Rail Gateway Warrington Bus Interchange UTC (Warrington)
Delivering Strategic Regional Sites Delivering the Regional Equality & Diversity Strategy
REGENERATE EAST LANCASHIRE, BLACKPOOL, BARROW AND WEST CUMBRIA Economic Development
Housing
Transport
Supporting people back into employment via employability and job brokerage activities
Average annual rate of housing provision (net of clearance replacement) (set out in Draft RSS) East Lancashire 1381 Blackpool 444 West Cumbria 497 Barrow 150
Enhance accessibility to the region’s principal North-South transport corridor thereby encouraging economic development in peripheral subregions of Furness and West Cumbria and connectivity to the City regions across the north
Maximise the positive impact of emerging housing market restructuring work in West Cumbria and Furness
A66 Temple Sowerby Bypass (committed scheme)
Encouraging employment creation in or near deprived areas Setting Housing Market Renewal in a strong economic context Investment in quality public realm in the cities
4
A595 Parton-Lillyhall Improvement (committed scheme)
REGENERATE EAST LANCASHIRE, BLACKPOOL, BARROW AND WEST CUMBRIA (continued) Economic Development
Housing
Transport
Develop and implement an integrated economic plan for West Cumbria, including support for nuclear decommissioning activity
Undertake strategic housing activity to tackle inappropriate supply of housing in Blackpool and Morecambe currently acting as a drag on local economic regeneration
A590 High and Low Newton ByPass improving access to Barrow
Develop and implement the Barrow Master Plan, including support for marine and leisure developments Implement the Blackpool Masterplan, including Blackpool as the priority location for regional casino development in the UK
Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway East Lancashire Rapid Transit
Maximise the positive impact of the East Lancashire Pathfinder within its broader housing market
Develop and implement an integrated economic plan for East Lancashire including support for advanced manufacturing
ENSURE ONGOING GROWTH IN THE RURAL ECONOMY AS PART OF THE REGIONAL RURAL DELIVERY FRAMEWORK Economic Development
Housing
Transport
Helping businesses to implement process and product/service innovation
Ensure a sufficient supply of affordable housing within rural areas including parts of Cheshire, Cumbria and Lancashire (an increasing priority over the ten year RFA period)
Develop integrated transport networks in rural areas based on hubs at key service centres.
Improving business resource efficiency and waste minimisation support Developing world class management / leadership skills Investment in quality public realm in key rural service centres
A66 Temple Sowerby Bypass (committed scheme)
Average annual rate of housing provision (set out in Draft RSS) Eden 239 South Lakeland 400 Lake District National Park 117
Develop the economic benefit of the region’s natural environment
Outputs The table below shows indicative headline outputs that the region will achieve over the next 10 year period (2006/7 to 20015/16) from the RFA funding streams. Key transport schemes are not outputs in themselves, but will support delivery of sustainable economic development.
Indicative Outputs No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
of jobs created or safeguarded of businesses created of people assisted in skills of dwellings improved of affordable housing completions of “committed” transport schemes completed of new transport schemes completed or underway
Number (2006/7 – 20015/16) 140,000 22,000 180,000 59,000 18,000 18 25
RFA funding, together with a wider range of public spending, will enable the region to improve its economic performance, maintain GVA growth above the UK average, and achieve the economic targets set out in the revised RES.
5
Regional Funding Allocations Guide to locations
6
16
17
45
Proposed HMR Area of West Cumbria and Furness
15
26
24
5
29
39
25 8
13 36
47 2
23
31
3
14 1 41
22
12
33
30 34 9
18
11
35
21 42
43
32
4
7
38
46
37
1
40
10 20
1 19
Deeside 44
28 27
Wrexham
Source: Ordnance Survey, Crown Copyright, All Rights Reserved. GD 021102.
6
KEY Northwest Region boundary
Strategic Regional Sites 1
New Heartlands HMR
2
East Lancashire HMR
3
Oldham Rochdale HMR 4
Manchester Salford HMR
5
Urban Regeneration Companies (URC) Areas
6 7
HMR and URC Areas
8
Northwest Motorways
9
Airports
10 11
Key Ports
12
Key Towns and Cities
13
Lake District National Park
14
Hadrian’s Wall
16
15 17 18 19
Regional Parks
20
1
East Lancashire
21
2
Ribble Estuary
22
3
Wigan Greenheart
4
Mersey Waterfront
5
Weaver Valley
23 24 25
Ashton Moss, Tameside Basford, Crewe Cuerden Regional Business Park, Preston/Leyland Daresbury Park, Halton Kingmoor, Carlisle Kings Business Park, Knowsley Kingsway, Rochdale Omega South, Warrington Royal Ordnance Factory, Chorley The Estuary, Speke/Garston Wirral International Business Park Barton, Salford Twelve Quays, Birkenhead Whitebirk, Lancashire Carrington, Trafford Chester Business Park Davenport Green, Trafford Ditton, Widnes Lancaster University/Bailrigg Liverpool University Edge Central Park, Manchester Parkside Former Colliery, St Helens Liverpool Science Park (Edge Lane) Westlakes, Whitehaven Alderley Park (Astra Zeneca), Macclesfield
Northwest Coastal Trail
Transport Priorities Committed Schemes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
Schemes Recommended for Funding 19
20 21
22 23 24
25
Local Authority Areas 1. 2. 3. 4.
Macclesfield Crewe and Nantwich Chester Ellesmere Port and Neston 5. Congleton 6. Vale Royal 7. Copeland 8. Carlisle 9. South Lakeland 10. Allerdale 11. Eden 12. Barrow-in-Furness 13. West Lancashire 14. Lancaster 15. Chorley 16. South Ribble 17. Rossendale 18. Fylde 19. Preston 20. Wyre 21. Pendle 22. Ribble Valley
23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40.
Hyndburn Burnley Bolton Bury Knowsley Liverpool Manchester Oldham Rochdale Salford Sefton Stockport St. Helens Tameside Trafford Wigan Wirral Blackburn with Darwen 41. Blackpool 42. Halton 43. Warrington
26 27
28 29 30 31 32
33
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
42 43
Areas of fastest GVA growth in the UK 1996-2003
A34 Alderley Edge and Nether Alderley Bypass A556 (M6 to M56) Improvement Access to port of Liverpool Improvement Ashton Northern Bypass Stage 2 Bidston Moss Viaduct (Jn.1 M53) Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway Upgrade Phase 1 Bolton Town Centre Public Transport Strategy Completion of Heysham to M6 link Crewe Green Link Road Southern Section Crewe Rail Gateway East Lancashire Rapid Transit Edge Lane/Eastern Approaches Glossop Spur Greater Manchester Authorities Highway Retaining Walls Strengthening Scheme Greater Manchester Urban Traffic Control (GMUTC) Hall Lane Strategic Gateway Leigh-Salford-Manchester QBC M60 JETTS QBC Mersey Gateway Metrolink Extensions Rochdale Interchange SEMMMS Relief Road Scheme Silver Jubilee Bridge Major Mantenance Scheme Thornton to Switch Island Link Yellow School Buses
Contingency Schemes 44 45
Areas of slowest GVA growth in the UK 1996-2003
Warrington Bus Interchange A58 Black Brook Diversion Metrolink Phase 1&2 Renewal Metrolink Phase 3 Freckleton St Bridge Carlisle Northern Development Route SEMMMS QBC Northern Orbital QBC Liverpool South Parkway UTC (Warrington) UTC (Greater Manchester) Manchester Salford Inner Relief Route Oldham Retaining Walls A57 Cadishead Way A590 High and Low Newton Bypass A66 Temple Sowerby Bypass A595 Parton - Lillyhall Improvement A57/A628 Mottram - Hollingworth Tintwistle
46 47
A55T/A483T Junction Improvement A685 Kirby Stephen Bypass Altrincham Interchange Wigan Inner Relief Road
Note: Locations are indicative only
7
1.3 How the Region would Maximise the Impact of any Increase in Funding and Would Minimise the Impact of any Decrease An overall funding increase of 10% per annum would give the Northwest an estimated additional £678m over the period 2008/9 to 2015/16. Such monies would be invaluable to enable the region to meet its ambitions and deliver increased GVA. £678m could be used to build, refurbish and/or clear many more hundreds of houses; and/or to deliver the four contingency transport schemes identified; and/or to speed up implementation of economic development plans. The opportunity such increased funding affords to act as a catalyst for even higher levels of investment, for example through “match funding” European Structural Funds, is highly important in the region. The region is committed to working together to ensure any increased funding would be properly appraised and allocated in line with the vision and priorities set out in section 1.1. The region is already concerned that level of funding via RFA will be insufficient to meet all the priorities identified through an evidence based approach. In particular the three-year regional housing pot funding over the period 2005/05 to 2007/08 represents a reduction in funds in real terms for the region, taking inflation into account. This, combined with insufficient and short term funding of Housing Market Renewal, undermines the region’s ability to tackle all its many needs. A 10% reduction in funding would have substantial negative impacts on the region. The Northwest already faces many institutional biases when compared with southern English regions for public sector investment, for example research and development. A reduction in funding would negatively impact on GVA growth, hinder the regeneration of key areas, impact badly on vunerable groups and have an impact of greater than 10% due to consequential reductions in levered funds including from the private sector. The region would work together to properly appraise and decide how to deal with any decreased funding, rather than simply applying the same percentage cut to all 3 funding areas. Similarly any reduction in the other public funding streams outside of the RFA process would be of great concern to the region. These currently provide more than £55 billion of public resource each year, of which the Regional Funding Allocation is less than 2%. However, the effectiveness of all of this public investment will be maximised if it is deployed to further the vision and priorities agreed in the region and set out within the revised RES, RHS, draft RSS and in this advice.
2. TAKING THE RFA PROCESS FURTHER FORWARD 2.1 Introduction Our statement of priorities is about more than prioritising spend on projects within the funds allocated. It is also about what the region can do in the future to make the RFA process even more effective and what central Government could do to assist what we believe should become an ongoing process. There are a number of issues on which we believe the region and the Government need to work together, and agree a way forward, in the short term. The first is the complex issue of establishing the correct level of decision making. In the current RFA request for advice, the inclusion of all transport schemes above £5 million meant that projects that were not of regional significance but costing above this had to be considered. The region wants to make informed choices about regional issues but those that are sub regional or even local should be left to their respective decision makers. In general that will mean a substantially higher threshold than £5 million. A mechanism for determining the allocation of funds at the sub regional level for those schemes costing less than the new threshold would clearly also need to be developed. The second is the availability and use of European Structural Funds post 2006. This is a major issue for the region, currently the largest UK regional recipient of Structural funds. The Northwest is seeking a significant allocation of funds, along with flexibility in their use, to boost our 8
sustainable economic development. There are the related issue of State Aids, including Regional Aid Guidelines, and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. Aligning these three policy instruments with the region’s visions and priorities will maximise their effectiveness. The third issue is the unique challenges faced by West Cumbria. It is one of the slowest growing parts of the UK and has been hard hit by the decline in its traditional manufacturing base and by restructuring of the rural economy. Nuclear decommissioning is a further challenge. Unlike other parts of the Northwest, it is not close to centres of economic growth and needs support through the West Cumbria Strategic Forum.
2.2 Future Directions for the Northwest Region Developing an integrated regional framework The statement of regional priorities - a joined-up summary of what matters most for the region across domains that have usually been treated separately - is an important first step towards the development of an integrated regional framework for the Northwest, grounded in the principles of sustainable development. This will be considered in more detail by partners in the coming year but would provide the overarching high-level policy framework for the region, building on the common vision and priorities that have emerged from the recent regional strategy revisions. Developing appropriate governance arrangements that align strategies In 2006 the region will bring forward proposals for a properly resourced Regional Housing Board. This will provide for housing and planning decisions to be more closely aligned and provide for partnership working bringing together the NWRA, NWDA and other partners. Likewise the region will initiate a discussion with the Department for Transport about future regional decision making. The region believes that the Northwest should have greater autonomy in making decisions about regional and sub-regional schemes and looks forward to establishing a Transport Board as soon as possible (as well as Passenger Transport Authorities for those sub regions without them.) This would enable the region to address key issues such as demand management and consideration of new transport schemes as they emerge, as well as reviewing priorities for transport spending. We will also work with the other two northern regions to establish the Northern Transport Compact to develop appropriate pan-northern approaches to transport. Agreeing a mechanism for monitoring and reviewing progress As part of the RFA process, NWDA and NWRA have agreed a mechanism for joint working and quarterly monitoring of all the schemes outlined in RFA. This will include agreeing adjustments to schemes subject to progress on the ground. In this way the region will be able to ensure overall delivery against our key strategic priorities.
2.3 Complementary Policy Considerations for central Government Widening the RFA Process The Northwest believes a greater number of funding streams should be included in the RFA process, to increase the potential of aligning strategies and maximising the effectiveness of public expenditure. The region supports the inclusion of all the current RFA funds, but feels there are some significant omissions, such as funding for skills development, and rail infrastructure and franchise funding. Skills policy is a key contributor to regional economic performance – skills and education is one of the five thematic priorities of the new RES - and there is already considerable working by regional partners to deliver better skills policy through the Regional Skills Partnership and Sector Skills & Productivity Alliances. The region is disappointed that rail expenditure is excluded from the RFA, but welcomes the commitment to include this in any future RFA guidance. The region also believes that the Transport Innovation Fund should be included within RFA.
9
On housing, our view is that Housing Market Renewal funding should be included within the regional housing allocation as a ring fenced allocation. This is due to the centrality of Pathfinders to the Housing Strategy in the region and will ensure far greater alignment and integration of HMR with the housing, economic development and transport elements of RFA. The RES identifies £72 billion available to the region between 2006/07 - 2008/09 for economic development and regeneration. The NWDA budget forms a relatively small part of this. The RFA Guidance indicates that budgets such as European funds, English Partnerships funding and growth area funding could be considered for inclusion within future RFA arrangements. The Northwest would welcome this. There will be £95 billion of other public expenditure over the same period in areas such as education, health and rural, and these sums could all be better focused in support of agreed regional priorities. Funding for community safety, public health and culture are key components of sustainable development and could be prioritised for inclusion in future RFA arrangements. Greater Spatial Planning and Strategy Alignment at the Centre The Northwest would benefit from greater alignment within central Government of its decisions regarding future investment in this region and, over time, a more co-ordinated spatial dimension to its decisions. The Northern Way has made a start, by emphasising the importance and centrality to the north of the Manchester-Leeds belt, and developing service activities and transport linkages which support that role, as well as connectivity with other city regions. This clearly supports Manchester’s position as a capital city for the northern knowledge economy as well as the Manchester Science City initiative. In addition the Mersey Ports represent the north’s international sea “Gateway” and improved access is now recognised as one of the three investment priorities for the Northern Way. Improved performance and output in the Northwest, for the benefit of the UK as a whole, requires support from national level policies. For example, if the Government presses ahead with plans for the concentration of research funding in a limited number of leading institutions, there is a strong case for channelling continued investment into the new Manchester University, to ensure that the North has at least one university in the top twenty in the world, as well as other universities in the region with world class reputations in particular fields. Likewise Liverpool Capital of Culture should be recognised as a key opportunity and benefit for the UK as a whole as well as the region. There is also a strong case for major (whole Department rather than piecemeal) civil service relocation to the Northwest. The benefits afforded by the relocation of the BBC to Greater Manchester should act as a spur to other substantial relocations. There are a number of locational opportunities in the region, which, for example, could assist in key regeneration programmes and capitalise on high quality ICT based infrastructure. Such interventions would enable the region to close the GVA gap, by offering better returns for investment than similar expenditure in the south. The development of a spatial plan for England, by both Treasury and ODPM in conjunction with the regions, in the longer term may be of great use for future investment planning. Specific Policy Changes that would Improve the Effectiveness of RFA A number of specific policy changes are outlined below which would support the efficient and effective use of the funds to achieve the overall objectives that the region is pursuing through RFA process, and in particular to address the brakes to growth outlined in section 1. The first brake on growth identified was weaknesses in the housing market, including affordable housing. The region’s local housing authorities would therefore like to recycle capital receipts (as is possible in Pathfinder areas) and make greater use of planning powers to deliver affordable housing. One model for exploring these issues further would be through greater freedoms and flexibilities for Local Area Agreements / Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. The region would be interested in designating pilot areas for further initiatives to deliver affordable housing. The second brake on growth identified was ineffective key transport infrastructure. The transport
10
spending priorities are aimed at maximising the potential of the Cities / City Regions and connecting areas of opportunity and need, as well as encouraging economic development in locations which better use the existing transport infrastructure. The region would encourage Government to consider improving the effectiveness of this spending by: • allowing local authorities greater flexibility to raise revenue. This could include the introduction of supplementary business rates, location levies (for business locating alongside major transport infrastructure developments) or developer gains tax • introducing a requirement for all new schemes to spend an equivalent percentage of the scheme costs on evaluating impacts over a short and long term horizons • greater engagement with the region in defining rail franchise agreements and network improvements, to better relate the rail industry to customer needs • reviewing the structure of Bus Quality Contracts, particularly regarding the issue of compensation where markets are failing, and opportunities for franchise arrangements. Greater flexibility to generate local revenue funding could provide a useful way of funding improvements to services. Concentrations of low productivity and enterprise levels, and high levels of worklessness were identified as the third brake on growth. The NWDA will therefore continue to work with Government on the key policy areas identified for input to Budget 2006: • the need to simplify and make more effective business support services in the region (to improve productivity and enterprise levels) • improving links between the national and regional frameworks for innovation (to improve productivity and enterprise levels) • unlocking the possibilities for more private sector investment in regeneration and economic development (to reduce worklessness)
3.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPENDING PRIORITIES
3.1 Key economic development issues and strategic priorities for the Northwest This section sets out advice to Government on the economic development strand of the RFA. It covers the budget of the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) and has been prepared in consultation with its partners. Sustainable economic development remains a major priority for the region and this is reflected in the recently updated Regional Economic Strategy (RES). At £98 billion GVA, it is the UK’s third largest regional economy but has historically underperformed. Compared to the English average, it has an output gap of over £13 billion. Other key gaps within the England average (based on size of population) include: • • • • •
80,000 fewer people working 120,000 more people with no qualifications 80,000 fewer people with degree level qualifications 90,000 fewer people in the knowledge economy 38,000 fewer companies
£3 billion of the output gap is due to fewer people of working age and fewer people working than the England average. £10 billion is due to lower productivity (GVA per employee), which, in part, is a reflection of the nature of jobs in the region, an above average proportion of which are part time. In the past, manufacturing companies dominated the Northwest economy but its structure is becoming increasingly similar to that of the country as a whole. Manufacturing is still very important to the Northwest however and tends to have above average productivity. The majority of the GVA gap is in the service sector, particularly business and professional services. 11
The updated RES sets out a very clear vision for the region – “to create a dynamic, sustainable international economy which competes on the basis of knowledge, advanced technology and a superb quality of life for all where: 1. Productivity and Enterprise levels are high, in a low carbon economy, driven by innovation, leadership excellence and high skills 2. Manchester and Liverpool are vibrant European Cities and, with Preston, are key drivers of City Regional growth 3. Growth opportunities around Crewe, Chester, Warrington, Lancaster and Carlisle are fully developed 4. Key Growth Assets are fully utilised (Priority Sectors, the Higher Education and Science Base, Ports/Airports, Strategic Regional Sites, the Natural Environment, especially the Lake District, and the Rural Economy) 5. The economies of East Lancashire, Blackpool, Barrow and West Cumbria are regenerated 6. Employment rates are high and concentrations of low employment are eliminated” The priorities for the NWDA spending plans identified below are rooted firmly in the revised RES, which: - Is based on a sound analysis and understanding of the economy and clearly aligned to national policy priorities - Has been the subject of extensive regional involvement, consultation and final endorsement - Sets out a clear regionally specific vision - Sets out an economic strategy, based on that vision, under 3 major drivers of the economy - Makes tough choices and is realistic, rather than covering everyone’s wish lists and agendas - Identifies 45 transformational actions, which are fundamental to achieving the vision and based on a clear rationale - Sets headline targets for the region - Incorporates the action plan within the RES, identifying lead partners for every action to ensure delivery. The RES identifies 3 major drivers of the economy. Firstly, the region needs to improve productivity and grow the market, building on its areas of success and its particular assets and opportunities to increase GVA per person employed. This means increasing the added value of jobs in the region as well as retaining its existing high value jobs. Secondly, the region needs to grow the size and capability of the workforce - getting more people working and specifically encouraging all forms of economic activity in our most deprived areas, areas remote from growth and amongst our most disadvantaged communities. This means ensuring that people from these communities have the skills required to work, linking people to job opportunities and by encouraging new enterprise activity. Thirdly, these two major drivers need to be underpinned by creating and monitoring the conditions for sustainable growth and private sector investment. This means investment in the region’s environmental culture and infrastructure (especially to link growth areas with more deprived communities), improving the quality of life, tackling deprivation, valuing diversity and social inclusion and recognising the social and environmental implications of economic growth. A detailed explanation of the relationship between the three drivers and the factors and objectives that influence them is given in the revised RES. This also shows how these priorities are clearly linked to the national policy agenda and reinforce Government objectives across a range of policy areas including the Treasury’s drivers of growth.
3.2 Methodology for determining economic development priorities The economic development funding priorities below have been determined by: (a) (b) 12
reference to the existing NWDA Corporate Plan (2005/06 - 2007/8) for the two year period 2006/7 to 2007/8; and by reference to the new RES and those transformational actions which are appropriate for NWDA funding for the eight year period 2008/9 to 2015/16.
The priorities for funding outlined are all designed to support the transformation of the Northwest economy and the achievement of the overall RES vision and its six transformational outcomes. In preparing this advice it must be noted that the existing Corporate Plan is based on RES 2003, but a new RES was submitted to Ministers for their endorsement in December 2005 (to commence in April 2006). Also, the Agency’s Strategic Investment Plan (SIP) 2006/7-2008/9 is currently under preparation, as is the updating of the Agency’s spending priorities in the light of the new RES. Both are expected to be approved by the Agency Board in March 2006. Therefore the final details of the priorities set out below are subject to confirmation in the light of these processes.
3.3 Priority economic development interventions (a)
The two-year period 2006/07 to 2007/08
The following are key project priorities drawn from the NWDA’s Corporate Plan 2005/06 to 2007/08. Key project priorities include:
Business • • • • • • • • • •
Undertaking cluster programmes in priority sectors Further developing the Tourism sector through implementing the Regional Tourism strategy Delivery of inward investment activity working closely with UKTI Delivery of the Northern Way growth strategy Supporting strategically important companies Deliver the Regional Manufacturing Plan via Agenda for Change Improve Business Resource Efficiency and Waste minimisation (BREW) support to business Support established small loans schemes and seed/ venture capital funds Implement the Northwest Science Strategy Support the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) agenda
Skills • Support the work of the Regional Skills Partnership to address the skills needs within the region to ensure that they meet business requirements • Maintain investment in basic skills tutor capacity, 14-19 developments and a focus on higher level skills
Regeneration • • • • • • •
Support the work of the Urban Regeneration Companies Support the delivery of Housing Market Renewal objectives Support activity which links areas of opportunity and need Delivery the Rural Renaissance programme Tackling the root causes of social exclusion and health inequalities Strengthen the enterprise culture Development of a Regional Compact with the Voluntary and Community Sector
Infrastructure • Continue to work closely with the Regional Assembly and Government Office to align regional strategies • Take forward the connectivity policies of the Northern Way Growth Strategy • Deliver the designated Strategic Regional employment sites
Image • • • •
Improve the image of the region through a range of marketing and communication activities Support each of the sub regional Tourist Boards Implement a tourism marketing programme to promote the tourism product Implement the Regional Major Events Strategy and support Liverpool Capital of Culture 2008
The Corporate Plan outlines headline output targets in relation to this activity. These outputs are updated annually and this update will be completed for 2006/7 as part of the revised SIP/spending priorities process. However, the existing Corporate Plan shows the following estimated outputs: 13
Indicator No. of jobs created or safeguarded No. of people assisted to gain employment No. of businesses created No. of businesses assisted No. of businesses assisted to collaborate with UK knowledge base £m of public and private investment levered: Total £m Proportion of Private Leverage Ha of brownfield land reclaimed or redeveloped No. of people assisted in skills No. of adults gaining Level 2 No. of adults gaining basic skills
2006/7
2007/8
14,000 925 2,150 12,000 565
14,500 950 2,200 12,300 580
370 50% 370 17,500 2,050 1,230
380 30% 380 18,000 2,100 1,260
The analysis of these priorities is based on the 2003 RES. This will be updated once the new RES has been endorsed by Ministers and is likely to lead to some reclassification of projects between the various different RES themes. Because of the number and diversity of Agency activities, priorities are expressed in terms of theme areas rather than individual projects. It should be noted that the categorisation above into the 5 RES chapters is not mutually exclusive in terms of addressing issues. Regeneration expenditure, for example, includes substantial activity to support business development and skills. The draft SIP re-categorises existing agency commitments into the activity split of the new 5 RES chapters, updating the figures in the Corporate Plan, as follows:
Programme (£m) 5
2006/07
2007/08
Business Skills People and Jobs Infrastructure Quality of Life Legacy RES Unallocated Resources
148 4 112 91 69 61 17
131 1 81 92 62 33 96
TOTAL
502
496
Priorities for unallocated resources will be determined by the SIP/spending priorities process currently underway, referred to above and due to be approved by the Agency Board in March 2006. NWDA is only a small part of the funding available for economic development priorities. We estimate that over this two-year period, the region will receive around £48billion for economic development and regeneration, of which £30billion is funding within the scope and influence of the RES and sub-region / city region action plans.
5
14
Total planned expenditure exceeds the funding allocation figures given in the RFA since it takes into account income from rents, receipts, European and other funding sources, and an element of “over-programming”. The category “Legacy RES” refers to committed expenditure on projects, which do not fall into the priority areas identified in the revised RES.
This includes substantial European funding, which will continue on present arrangements until the end of this period. Uncertainty over the future European funding arrangements continues but the RES and these priorities provide a clear basis for its effective utilisation of any such funds in the future. (b)
The eight year period 2008/09 to 2015/16
The longer term priorities for economic development funding will be increasingly focused around the six Transformational Outcomes, set out in the revised RES and specifically the 45 Transformational Actions which support them. The Agency is currently reviewing its spending priorities in the light of the new RES and this process will be completed by the March Board meeting. However, of the Transformational Actions, examples of those most likely to be of particular interest for NWDA funding include:
Business • • • • • •
Cluster programmes in priority sectors Exploiting opportunities from a Media Enterprise Zone linked to the BBC relocation Helping businesses to implement process and product/service innovation Enhance Business/HEI collaboration and knowledge transfer Supporting major research concentrations and knowledge nuclei Improving business resource efficiency and waste minimisation support
Skills and Education: • Delivering the skills required to maximise the economic impact of key growth opportunities • Developing world class management / leadership and corporate social responsibility skills
People and Jobs: • Supporting people back into employment via employability and job brokerage activities linking areas of growth and need • Stimulating economic activity in areas remote from growth – especially East Lancashire, Blackpool, Barrow and West Cumbria • Encouraging employment creation in or near deprived areas
Infrastructure: • Delivering designated Strategic Regional Sites • Setting Housing Market Renewal in a strong economic context
Quality of Life: • Delivering the Regional Equality and Diversity Strategy • Investment in quality public realm, green space and environmental quality in key locations • Develop the economic benefit of the region’s natural environment Advice on economic development spending priorities for this eight year period is problematic since a number of major influences will impact of final decisions including: • Performance of the regional and national economies in the intervening period • The outcome of the next RES Review scheduled for 2009 • The outcome of the 2007 Spending Review which will impact not just on NWDA priorities but more significantly on the other organisations which provide the bulk of economic development activity in the region. RFA guidance includes planning assumptions for later years based on the Government’s 2% inflation target. These figures can only be regarded as indicative but for the eight-year period 2008/09 to 2015/6 would provide an NWDA budget for economic development of £3.5 billion.
15
In the absence of realistic alternative assumptions, NWDA spending figures have been projected forward on the basis of the priority split in the draft SIP as follows:
£m Business
1240
Skills
33
People and Jobs
938
Infrastructure
762
Quality of Life
578
TOTAL
4
3551
HOUSING SPENDING PRIORITIES
4.1 Key housing issues and strategic priorities for the Northwest The priorities and advice set out here roll forward the Regional Housing Strategy (RHS) published in July 2005 and is based on our understanding that the key role for regional housing pot funding in the region is to intervene in those areas where the market is not functioning well thereby helping it to operate more effectively. The Northwest is a varied and complex region and the housing issues in the region reflect this. With the greatest levels and concentrations of non-decent and obsolete housing in the country, measures to tackle existing stock in the Northwest need to be a combination of improvement and clearance. Alongside housing stock issues and areas of market weaknesses there are also many areas – “hot spots” - where affordability is a significant and growing issue and is acting as a break to the growth of the local and regional economy. The overall vision within the regionally agreed Housing Strategy is of “a region working together to deliver a housing offer that will promote and sustain maximum economic growth, ensuring all residents can access a choice of good quality housing in successful, secure and sustainable communities.” The objectives for housing intervention are therefore to provide decent homes and sustain communities; support and lead regeneration in areas of greatest deprivation and providing affordable housing where the market is ‘over heating’, in order to underpin the economic success of the region. The four Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder projects already established within the Northwest and 3 other low demand initiatives being developed are regarded as being absolutely essential for the economic and social development plans of the region and key to delivering our strategic priorities. The RFA process is vital to support our spending priorities in the region both through the Regional Housing Pot and Housing Market Renewal funding. As will be seen later, a significant part of the RHP funds allocated will be used to support Housing Market Renewal projects and we provide advice about future funding needs of the Housing Market Renewal initiatives at the conclusion of this section. The following key priorities determined by the Regional Housing Strategy are, in order of importance: • • • •
Housing Housing Housing Housing
Priority Priority Priority Priority
1 2 3 4
– Delivering urban renaissance through Pathfinders and other schemes – Providing affordable homes to maintain balanced communities – Delivering decent homes in thriving neighbourhoods – Meeting the needs of communities and providing support for those who need it (including through priorities 1 to 3 above)
These priorities need to be understood within the context of the region’s view – as in the draft RSS - that the total number of new dwellings to be provided in the Northwest is 403,060 over the 16
period 2003 to 2021 with an approximate annual average rate of 22,392 up from the current level of 17 to 20,000. However much of each year’s new provision will be provided by the private sector without recourse to public subsidy.
4.2 Methodology for determining regional housing priorities The RHS, which forms the basis of this advice, has been widely consulted upon and has strong buy-in from regional partners/stakeholders. The Priorities have been determined through the six month RHS review process. The Regional Housing Board, working closely with regional, subregional and local stakeholders commissioned research to build understanding of the local housing markets; reviewed the impact of previous interventions; considered changes in the national and regional policy context; and held three wide ranging consultation exercises. As a result of this, the priorities originally identified in 2003 were refined, but not substantially altered and are widely regarded as appropriate and realistic. Market changes however, make it difficult to forecast with any degree of accuracy so we have had to assume that the housing markets in the Northwest will continue to perform much as they have over the past few years, with house prices continuing to increase albeit at a slower rate. We have also had to assume that progress towards delivering the PSA and HMR targets will continue on the current trajectory. All of this means that the balance of priorities set out in this paper, and the associated outputs, must be seen as our current best estimate. They will need to be reviewed regularly and thoroughly to ensure that they remain appropriate and that we are achieving the best value for money. Finally, we have assumed that resources for the Regional Housing Pot (RHP) will remain at current levels, currently £249 million a year, plus inflation. We are confident that our proposals make the best use of this resource although the recent allocation for the Northwest regional housing pot was a disappointment as we were the only English region not to see an increase over and above the current level. There are concerns that this will not allow us to tackle all the many and multiple housing needs in the Northwest as soon as our economic and transport ambitions may require. In light of this stakeholders across the Northern regions are working on proposals for the greater flexibilities that would enable them to achieve more for whatever level of funding comes to us, although they are also preparing to lobby for more resource. The proposed Regional Housing Board will be well placed to undertake further work on these matters as well as make representations as required.
4.3 Priority housing market interventions a)
Regional Housing Priorities
Housing Priority 1 – Delivering urban renaissance • To maximise the positive impact of the four Housing Market Renewal Pathfinders in their broader housing markets • To maximise the positive impact of the emerging market restructuring work in West Cumbria and Furness • To support cohesive strategic activity to tackle the inappropriate supply of housing in Blackpool and Morecambe currently acting as a drag on local economic regeneration • To support cohesive strategic activity to prevent low demand, tackle inappropriate supply and support Neighbourhood Renewal in other areas at risk of market failure, applying and adapting lessons from the Pathfinders. The rationale underpinning this priority is that the Northwest has the highest concentrations of housing market weakness in the country (in excess of 400,000 homes in HMR areas). Whilst house prices have generally risen strongly in the region, the gap between the strongest and weakest markets has actually increased and there are concerns that speculative purchasing by investors and by the increase in the “buy to let” market mean that even those price rises attained in low demand areas are not sustainable yet consequently this may impact on scheme delivery eg through use of compulsory purchase orders.
17
Housing Priority 2 – Providing affordable homes to maintain balanced communities • To tackle the shortages of affordable housing in areas of the Northwest where demand for additional housing is high, and where this impacts adversely on social inclusion and the sustainable growth of local, sub-regional and regional economies. The rationale underpinning this priority is that there were sharp increases in house prices across the Northwest 2002-2004 - in 2002 the median house price was £70,000 and by the end of 2004 this had risen to £106,100. Prices levelled off in the first half of 2005 but income growth has not kept pace and as higher priced areas continue to experience the greatest increases, the gap between higher and lower priced areas has widened. It is recognised that affordable housing will also be provided for as an integral part of delivery of Priority 1 in the urban renaissance areas (above) as well as in the more traditional high demand areas such as the Lake District and Cheshire, but this advice moves resource towards high demand areas in their future allocations. Housing Priority 3 – Delivering decent homes in thriving neighbourhoods • To improve the condition of housing stock with a sustainable future as part of broadly based regeneration strategies, particularly in areas of concentrated unfitness and disrepair. The 2010 Decent Homes targets are the benchmark that we are working towards to improve both public and private sector housing stock. The great majority of our LAs have now transferred their stock or set up an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) to achieve the 2010 target for all public sector stock to meet a decent standard. More than 100,000 Northwest public sector properties are currently non-decent but by 2010 this figure is expected to fall dramatically to 15,000 given the projected levels of funding. This is a considerable achievement, which illustrates the ability of regional partners to respond to Government policy. The 70% target for private sector decency for vulnerable households is less certain as we do not currently have robust baseline data against which to measure progress. ODPM estimates suggest in excess of 400,000 vulnerable households in the private sector, of whom almost half are in non-decent properties. ODPM suggest that the average cost of bringing a property in the private sector up to a decent standard would cost £9,000. This presents the region with a significant challenge to bring 140,000+ properties at a cost of £9,000 per unit up to Decent Homes standards by 2010. We will also need to ensure that decency is maintained once the PSA target is met; and will need to consider how best to achieve this. Whilst we are well advanced as a region in developing equity sharing loans for this kind of work, this is still a young policy area and it is not yet clear how well the anticipated capital recycling will work in practice. Housing Priority 4 – Meeting the needs of communities and providing support for those who need it • To ensure that action under Priorities 1 – 3 contributes to meeting the housing needs of the Northwest’s diverse communities and those individuals needing support. • To encourage and support specialist housing provision to meet community and individual needs via targeted action at a local level. The rationale underpinning this priority is that the majority of people living in the region have housing that meets their needs, but for some individuals or communities a lack of appropriate housing can be a contributory factor to social exclusion. The Regional Housing Board is clear that this affects the overall success of the region in addition to the impact it has on individuals and their families. Support for action that will mean that everyone, whatever their circumstances, has access to a home that meets their needs is therefore specifically included as a priority for the region, although action will mostly be delivered through the other three priorities. b)
Spend against Priorities
The current division of Regional Housing Pot (RHP) is 55% for Priorities 1 and 3 via Local Authorities and 45% for Priority 2 through the Housing Corporation investment also programme. However, initiatives and funding targeted at Priorities 1, 2 and 3, through both sectors, also contribute to Priority 4 activities. 18
Regional Housing Pot funding Local Authorities
Housing Corporation
(Priorities 1&3)
(Priority 2)
2006/7 – 2007/8
274
224
274
2008/9 – 2010/11
427
350
427
2011/12– 2015/16
772
631
772
1473
1205
1473
All figures are in £million
Total
Total
We propose to maintain the split between Local Authorities and Housing Corporation for the foreseeable future and the subdivision between priorities. We will however review this in the light of housing market intelligence and progress made against priorities. In particular we are aware that if current trends continue, affordability will continue to grow in significance for the region. However, the needs of the Priority 1 areas are unlikely to decrease significantly until the end of the RFA period and continuing support will be needed to achieve the decent homes standard. The community needs (Priority 4) agenda is also growing and, given the ageing population, may need to grow further. Allocations through to 2007/08 have been made on a formula basis taking account of 2005/06 allocations and agreed by ODPM Ministers. For allocations post 2007/08 the Board proposes to review this methodology to enable better value for money evaluations to be made and to encourage new funding models and partnership delivery. In addition, we will ensure that all available non-resource tools are developed and employed. These will include: planning tools and powers we have to develop appropriate solutions; opportunities presented by new forms of tenure such as equity sharing and homebuy; the development of Real Estate Investment Trusts; possible new roles for the best ALMOs and optimising the effectiveness of the existing stock through initiatives such as empty property strategies and private sector landlord licensing. We will also encourage efficiency savings that can then be redeployed, but this is unlikely to yield major sums quickly. We will also ensure that in implementing RHS a robust evidence base with up to date housing market intelligence is developed, working with partners in the region. Housing Outputs
c)
Figures for outputs from the programmes are very difficult to estimate due to the complexity of the multiple issues being tackled and the current lack of robust baseline evidence and up to date statistics on private sector decency. Most parts of the region are tackling housing issues using a multitude of funding streams, including NDC and NRF money: this makes it impossible to draw out only those outputs that HMR and/or RHP money is funding. The estimates given below are based on recent activity rates extrapolated against RHP funding assumptions:
All Areas (excluding HMR funding) Number of dwellings improved Public
6
Private
Total
2006/7 – 2007/8
3,000
9,500
12,500
2008/9 – 2010/11
1,500
15,000
19,500
2011/12– 2015/16
0
27,000
27,000
4,500
51,500
59,000
Total
In terms of affordable housing we can expect the number of units to be provided to also remain broadly similar to recent past trends, with some adjustment for efficiency savings7. 6 7
These figures are for RHP funded activity only – most activity will be funded from ALMO/RSL funds 5% assumed
19
Estimated affordable housing completions (based on past build rates)
Number of affordable housing units Social rented
Other, including Low Cost Home Ownership
Total
2006/07 – 2007/08
2,491
1,244
3,735
2008/09 – 2010/11
3,739
1,002
4,741
2011/12 – 2015/16
6,900
3,000
9,900
13,130
5,246
18,376
Total d) Advice on Housing Market Renewal
The success of the HMR Pathfinders in the Northwest is absolutely central not only to the delivery of the RHS but also the RES, Northern Way Growth Strategy and for the Sustainable Communities Plan itself. Therefore the four Pathfinders together with other low demand areas, including West Cumbria and Furness, will remain the region’s highest spatial priority and funding provided via the RFA will continue to complement the dedicated HMR funding. Our assumption for 2006/07 and 2007/08 is that the full planned financial HMR allocation of £408m will be taken up. Beyond that date assumptions are based on the Scheme Updates currently being evaluated by GO-NW and ODPM. All of the Northwest Pathfinder Scheme Updates show growing programmes up until 2012. This situation is inevitable with such major programmes, which have to think long term, gather momentum and move from planning to delivery. The programmes together -including proposals being drawn up by the Greater Manchester and Merseyside Local Authorities for two additional low demand areas - show the following estimated HMR funding requirements:
Years
Total HMR funding
HMR funding pa
2006/07 – 2007/08
£408m
£204m
2008/09 – 2010/11
£567m
£283m
2011/12 – 2015/16
£1,620m
£270m
Total
£2,615m
-
Based on this renewal programme, the following output in the HMR areas may be expected:
HMR Areas – Outputs/ Number Of Dwellings8
Cleared
Refurbished9
2006/7 – 2007/8
6,947
16,278
2008/9 – 20010/11
6,386
15,722
2011/12 – 2015/16
12,564
14,358
Total
25,897
46,358
8
9
20
Includes a small number of public sector homes. Outputs are from the programme as a whole which includes HMR and RHP funds Some of this activity will also contribute to public and private sector decency targets
However, advice from ODPM has suggested that it is unlikely that additional resources will be made available above the current £204m pa (plus inflation). Whilst there may be some room for negotiating efficiency savings, this is unlikely to make much impact on the shortfall in our expectations, and there is little scope for finding more funding from the RHP since the great majority of that funding already goes to the Pathfinders and other HMR areas. Moreover, given that affordability is a growing issue for the region, the option of moving money from new provision to improving existing stock is not feasible. In the absence of an increase in current levels, the most likely scenario would be spending re-profiled over a longer timescale, thus slowing the rate of delivery and reducing options for altering the balance of spending between priorities post 2010. This situation is untenable and cannot be supported by the region as it would undermine delivery against our strategic priorities. On this basis the Regional Housing Board and other stakeholders have expressed the strong desire to support the Pathfinders and other areas through Housing Market Renewal funding in line with their expectations, as set out in the profile above. In doing so we would expect additional funding to be made available, increasing from the current level of £204m a year to £283m a year by 2010 and a commitment to longer term funding, consistent with this RFA process.
5
TRANSPORT SPENDING PRIORITIES
5.1 Key transport issues and strategic priorities for the Northwest (a)
Key issues
The Northwest lies at the intersection of two internationally important transport corridors, one running from north to south, the other from west to east. The region’s main international gateways (Manchester Airport, Liverpool John Lennon airport and the Port of Liverpool) are also located within these corridors. Collectively, these corridors and gateways, together with regional and subregional corridors, provide excellent connections with the rest of the UK, as well as with Ireland, Europe and the rest of the world. They are of prime importance in supporting our vision of a more prosperous and inclusive region. As a result of substantial investment over the last 50 years, the region has one of the most extensive motorway networks in the UK. However, it also suffers from the highest trunk road congestion outside London. On parts of the motorway network, worsening journey time reliability is a major problem, particularly for business and industry. In urban areas, congestion is reducing the reliability of road-based public transport. Elsewhere, the main issues relate to road safety, and the environmental and social impact of traffic in towns, villages and the wider countryside. Much of the region is now benefiting from significantly improved rail services to the rest of the country, helped by the recent completion of the West Coast Main Line upgrade and the fleet replacement programme currently being progressed by First TransPennine Express. The region also boasts the most intensive local rail network outside the South East; however, the quality of many local services and infrastructure leaves much to be desired, and congestion on some rail routes, both in terms of the number of trains and passengers, is now a serious concern. On the other hand, there are opportunities to improve both the quality and capacity of mass transit systems, including better links within and between city regions. (b)
Key objectives
The draft Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) clearly identifies that local authorities, the Highways Agency, the rail industry and other transport providers will need to work together to ensure that the Northwest’s transport networks are planned, managed, operated and improved in an integrated context. The draft RTS also sets out eight objectives to help deliver a transport system for the future, of which the following provide a summary: • Improve journey time reliability and tackle congestion on the region’s principal NorthSouth and East-West transport corridors. • Develop effective, integrated transport networks within, to and between City Regions.
21
• Underpin the gateway functions of region’s main airports and ports. • Improve the public realm and encourage a shift from the car to more sustainable modes of transport. • Develop integrated transport networks in rural areas based on hubs at key service centres. • Reduce the wider environmental, social, health and quality of life impacts of road transport and infrastructure. • Secure the safe reliable and effective operation of transport links between the peripheral sub-regions of Furness and West Cumbria and the region’s principal North-South transport corridor and enhance access to key employment locations. • Facilitate opportunities for increasing movement of freight by rail and on water
5.2 Methodology for determining transport priorities (a)
Introduction
The North West Regional Transport Forum commissioned consultants Atkins to undertake an exercise to prioritise local authority major schemes (ie schemes costing over £5m) and those Highways Agency schemes not on routes of strategic national importance, and to develop an investment programme to deliver these priorities. The prioritisation framework involved a two-stage assessment process. The first stage assessed schemes against: regional, sub-regional and local policy criteria, grouped by economy, social inclusion and the environment. The regional criteria were derived from those developed by JMP Consulting on behalf of the NWRA for the purpose of developing a methodology for determining regional transport priorities to be included in the Regional Transport Strategy. The criteria included a number that are related to the delivery of PSAs e.g. the economic criteria included ones relating to improving business competitiveness, the support of business clusters, improving international, national and regional trade connections. The social criteria looked at support for housing renewal areas, sustainable growth in urban and rural areas and accessibility. The environment criteria addressed issues such as air quality and the best use of existing resources. The sub-regional and local policy criteria focussed on criteria which are more relevant to Local Transport Plans. (b)
Value for money assumptions
The second stage involved the development of value for money (VfM) and deliverability criteria, which were key considerations in developing the region’s recommendations. These were based on existing DfT guidance and included criteria on benefit/cost ratio (BCR) and private sector contributions. The deliverability criteria took into consideration factors such as the affordability of a scheme, risk factors and statutory processes. The final policy framework and value for money/deliverability criteria are included in the separate report from Atkins. Value for money assumptions and BCR are included for each scheme in Table 2. (c)
Scoring
The schemes were scored on a seven-point scale with each scheme receiving between one point (lowest score) and seven points (highest score) against each criterion. An element of the consultant’s professional judgment was required when scoring a scheme against some of the criteria. (d)
Weightings
The final appraisal framework contained 28 policy criteria and nine value for money and deliverability criteria. In order to guide the development of a realistic investment programme, the value for money and deliverability criteria were weighted so that they accounted for 50% of the total marks available. The three strands of policy criteria (economy, environment and social) were given two different weightings. First, they were weighted equally, ie one third each. The weightings were then adjusted to give a 50% weighting in favour of the economic criteria, reflecting the overarching objective of the RFA process to help improve economic performance and reduce the region’s 22
£13bn GVA productivity gap; environment and social criteria were weighted equally at 25%. Results showed that only one scheme moved in or out of the top quartile as a result of using the two different policy weighting scenarios, confirming the robustness of the methodology The Regional Transport Forum recommended that the latter weighting be used in the RFA recommendation. This was subsequently agreed by the Regional Leadership Group.
5.3 Priority transport interventions (a)
Proposed investment programme
Over 100 schemes were assessed by Atkins and divided into four parts or “quartiles” based on their assessment score, with approximately 25 schemes in each quartile. Schemes within the top quartile are presented in alphabetical order in Table 1. (b)
Rail
Funding for rail infrastructure and franchises is currently not included in the RFA allocation, but the intention is that this will be included in the future. Station and interchange improvements can be funded through the RFA, and a number of such schemes were included in the prioritisation exercise. Certain infrastructure and franchise schemes were also included in response to comments received from some local authorities who considered it important to understand how rail schemes performed compared to other transport schemes. Of the 13 schemes put forward, additional rolling stock for Greater Manchester fell in Quartile 1. Schemes for the Halton Curve, the Olive Mount Chord and the St. Helens Central - Junction rail link fell in Quartile 2. It should be stressed, however, that this was not a comprehensive exercise to prioritise all rail schemes in the region, and there other potential schemes which would need to be considered when rail funding is included in the RFA. (c)
Alignment with RTS and Northern Way priorities
Given the criteria were derived from those developed for the NWRA by JMP Consulting, it is reassuring to note that there is around an 80% correlation with the priorities identified in the RTS work and those identified in the RFA exercise. Discrepancies are accounted for by the fact that the RTS prioritisation work does not specifically include value for money and deliverability in its ranking. The region is also pleased to report that there is a strong consistency with priorities identified by the Northern Way (which focus on North-South and East-West links and access to ports and airports). Consistency with RTS and Northern Way priorities is indicated in the attached Table 2. (d)
Transport Innovation Fund
It was acknowledged at the outset that TIF funding would not be incorporated into Regional Funding Allocations. The region has not assumed that TIF will support any particular scheme. Government should note that the promoters of the Manchester Metrolink Phase 3 are seeking TIF resources to support the expansion plans. The total funding sought for Manchester Metrolink from the RFA has been held at £260m, which is within the ceiling set by DfT. Metrolink Phase 3 is the largest scheme seeking funding from RFA. The promoters’ original cost profiles were not feasible within the annual allocations. The investment programme therefore suggests that if Metrolink were to secure TIF funding, it could undertake prudential borrowing to fund expenditure in line with its proposed profile. The “re-imbursement” costs could then be funded via RFA later in the programme to smooth the regional expenditure profile. (e)
Commitments
Of the potential £1.35bn available from 2005/06 to 2015/16, £387.7m is required to fund 14 LA fully approved schemes and four HA schemes in the TPI with projected start dates before 2008. As these schemes were considered as committed, subject to statutory processes, they were not prioritised in the exercise. (These schemes are outlined in table 3).
23
The region currently has a number of schemes which have been given provisional approval. Whilst the RFA process was progressing, Ministers approved two of these schemes (the A58 Blackbrook Diversion and Warrington Bus Interchange). They also announced that Merseytram Line 1 could not proceed. (Merseytravel have been granted a judicial review of this decision and should this lead to a change in the Government’s decision then the region will need to review its advice.) All of the remaining schemes with provisional approval, with the exception of Wigan Inner Relief Route, fall in Quartile 1 and funding for them is recommended by the region. (f)
Cost estimates and profiles
In order to ensure a common approach for prioritisation purposes, and upon advice from DfT, all scheme costs were converted to 2005 prices using the Retail Price Index to represent price inflation, and any optimisation bias was removed. As scheme outturn costs were not commonly available, these 2005 prices were also used in the expenditure profiles. The region accepts that inflation will have some impact on the affordability of the overall proposed investment programme in later years. The region would like to engage in a constructive dialogue with the Department when future schemes come forward for approval regarding the implications of any scheme inflation costs. The initial spend was heavily frontloaded for 2008/09 and 2009/10. Atkins attempted to smooth out the investment profile by considering which schemes could be implemented later or phased over more years. Scheme promoters were consulted on these revised profiles to ensure that they still offered value for money. Overall the region’s expenditure is within the indicative allocations, except for the first few years where there is a very slight overspend in the early years due to the large degree of existing commitments. This small overspend is offset against the underspend in 05/06. (g)
Procurement assumptions
Total scheme costs were included in the value for money and deliverability assessment. There are two large schemes looking for PFI funding: Mersey Gateway and the South East Manchester Multi Modal Study Relief Roads. However, only the conventional funding element of these schemes is included in the investment programme. If PFI approval is not forthcoming, both these schemes, and any others seeking PFI, will need to be re-assessed. The region recognises that for all schemes over ÂŁ40m, PFI will need to be explored by scheme promoters. (h)
Contingency for schemes not fully funded by RFA
The region recognises that all schemes will still need to be fully appraised by DfT before final decisions can be made. It is recognised that not all regional priorities may gain approval and the region has therefore identified a number of contingency schemes that can be brought forward for funding. These schemes were identified as those at the top of Quartile two and comprise: Altrincham Interchange, A55/A483 Chester Business Park Junction Improvement, Wigan Inner Relief Road and the A685 Kirkby Stephen by-pass.
24
Promoting Authority
Cheshire Highways Agency Highways Agency Greater Manchester Merseyside Blackpool Greater Manchester Lancashire Cheshire Cheshire Blackburn with Darwen Merseyside Greater Manchester Greater Manchester Greater Manchester Merseyside Greater Manchester Greater Manchester Halton Greater Manchester Greater Manchester Greater Manchester Halton Merseyside Greater Manchester
Scheme
A34 Alderley Edge and Nether Alderley Bypass. A556 (M6 to M56) Improvement. Access to Port of Liverpool Improvement. Ashton Northern Bypass Stage 2. Bidston Moss Viaduct (Junction 1 of the M53 motorway). Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway Upgrade – Phase 1. Bolton Town Centre Public Transport Strategy Completion of Heysham to M6 Link. Crewe Green Link Road (Southern Section). Crewe Rail Gateway. East Lancashire Rapid Transit. Edge Lane/Eastern Approaches. Glossop Spur. Greater Manchester Authorities Highway Retaining Walls Strengthening Scheme.
Greater Manchester Urban Traffic Control (GMUTC). Hall Lane Strategic Gateway. Leigh-Salford-Manchester QBC. M60 JETTS QBC. Mersey Gateway. Metrolink Extensions. Rochdale Interchange. SEMMMS Relief Road Scheme. Silver Jubilee Bridge Major Maintenance Scheme. Thornton to Switch Island Link. Yellow School Buses. Total New (up to 2015/16) Total Committed Total Estimated Spend (up to 2015/16) Regional Allocation/Planning Assumption Difference (negative figure denotes annual overspend)
6.8
9
4.5
8
113.16 121 7.84
119 45.158 -5.942 -23.304 7.15
117
113
115
67.842 120.942 140.304 111.85
1.7
123
121.3
0
121.3
77.6
41
5
1
35.56
23.3
24.5
6
5
3
4
4.5
2
2
16
1
2
3
2
5
8
3
3
1
1.5
1.5
3
6.6
1.5
3
16.3
5 2
3
3 1
22.5
14.5
3
0.9
125
124.1
0
124.1
2.3
6
-0.6
128
128.6
0
128.6
1
6
13.3
28
8
7
15.9
10
5
-1.5
130
131.5
0
131.5
5
5
3
40
28
2.4
9
4
7
6 21.6
13.1
5
10
11
10
0.8
2.1
16.7
2.1
10
5
11.3
31
10.6
10
10 12
3.5
2 5
2
13
13.5
5
12
67.842 96.442 117.004 70.85
2.5
1.5
1
1.5
1
1
5
5
1
0.2
132
131.8
0
131.8
5
80
10.8
36
0
135
135
0
135
7
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
5
55
22
3
85
21
40
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
3.7
20
13.6 12.5 44.7 25.4 64.0 260.0 10.0 33.8 31.0 9.3 25.7 938.7 387.698 1326.398 1358 31.602
39.5 107.0 45.0 8.3 35.0 66.6 23.8 92.6 6.0 32.6 20.0 15.8 8.1 35.0
(millions)
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 RFA /06 /07 /08 /09 /10 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 Funding
Total scheme costs are not shown - only the amount required from the Regional Funding Allocation is shown
NOTE: All costs have had optimism bias removed (on the advice of DfT) and are standardised to 2005 prices for comparison purposes
Table 1 - Investment programme ordered alphabetically
Creates better integrated public transport services within Manchester City Region
Supports the growth of the port of Heysham by providing efficient trading links.
Bolton Town Centre Public Transport Strategy
Completion of Heysham to M6 Link.
Q2
Local
Q1
Local
Links deprived areas into job opportunities and supports opportunities arising from casino development. Improving public transport patronage has been identified as a priority within the draft RES.
Improve and manage demand on Gtr. Mancs. Highway network.
Ashton Northern Bypass Stage 2.
Q2
Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway Upgrade – Phase 1.
Liverpool port provides a global gateway for the regional and national economy and is well placed to benefit from the expansion of world trade.
Access to Port of Liverpool Improvement.
Q2
Q1
Provide key access to the region, Manchester Airport and Manchester City Region but suffer from high levels of congestion.
A556 (M6 to M56) Improvement.
Local
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Northern RTS RES Way Prioritisation
Bidston Moss Viaduct (Junction 1 of the M53 motorway).
Exploit opportunities to improve access to knowledge base.
Wider regional objectives
Justification of priority (eg significance in meeting wider regional objectives, strategies and plans)
A34 Alderley Edge and Nether Alderley Bypass.
Scheme name
Table 2 - Scheme Details
BCR of 7.4 (High VfM)
BCR of 1.4 (Low Value for Money)
BCR of 1.6 (Medium VfM)
Information not available
B CR of 1.9 (Medium VfM)
BCR of 3 (High VfM)
BCR of 9 High (VfM)
BCR of 1.4 (Low Value for Money)
Vfm/BCR (where available)
Major scheme business case submission is currently being considered by the DfT.
Major scheme business case submission is currently being considered by the DfT. A minimum of £16m is required between 2006/7 and 2008/9 to take into account essential maintenance needs of the existing tramway. The implications of a longer phased programme on rolling stock has not been quantified.
Full maintenance option assumed which is the least cost option, would have the least environmental impact and would not be subject to statutory procedures or any land acquisition which may be the case with other options.
Planning Approval for the road was granted in September 2003. The Council has been expecting to make CPO and Side Roads Orders in December 2005. Implementation be brought forward once the Statutory Processes have been completed if funding was available.
Currently at an early stage of investigation by the Highways Agency. This has been identified as a significant priority for the Northern Way and a priority within the draft RES. Has links to Thornton to Switch Island scheme.
This is the Highways Agency’s top priority regional scheme for the NW. Not yet at an advanced stage – under investigation for entry to the TPI. This has been identified as a significant priority for the Northern Way and a priority within the draft RES. Assumed 2.5 year construction period – Late 2013 to early 2014
This is Cheshire’s top priority scheme. It has been approved by DfT subject to the RFA process, has been through a public inquiry and has planning permission. Design is substantially complete and scheme could proceed to construction soon after funding is approved.
Comments (eg risks to deliverability or timing, links to housing/ regeneration projects
Links an area of need to growth opportunities in two City Regions.
This scheme, together with Hall Lane improves access to the Liverpool City Centre and support the growth of the City Region. They also support two strategic employment sites and improve the city’s image.
East Lancashire Rapid Transit.
Edge Lane/Eastern Approaches.
Local
Maintenance will ensure better management of existing highway network.
Reduce need to travel by car by integrating measures to manage travel demand. Reducing congestion has been identified as a priority within the draft RES.
This scheme, together with Edge Lane, improve access to the Liverpool City Centre and support the growth of the City Region. They also support two strategic employment sites and improve the city’s image.
Greater Manchester Authorities Highway Retaining Walls Strengthening Scheme.
Greater Manchester Urban Traffic Control (GMUTC).
Hall Lane Strategic Gateway.
Q1
Local
Local
Glossop Spur.
Q1
Q1
Q3
Supports development of effective regional integrated public transport network.
Crewe Rail Gateway.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Northern RTS RES Way Prioritisation Q4
Wider regional objectives
Justification of priority (eg significance in meeting wider regional objectives, strategies and plans)
Crewe Green Link Road (Southern Section).
Scheme name
BCR of 2.1 (High VfM)
BCR of 7.4 (High VfM)
Est BCR of 4.6 (High VfM)
High Value for Money
BCR of 2.1 (High VfM)
BCR of 3.1 (High VfM)
BCR of approx 3 (High VfM)
Information not available
Vfm/BCR (where available)
Currently undergoing a public inquiry that has been put on hold due to the decision about Merseytram Line 1. Ideally this scheme needs to be completed in time for the Capital of Culture in 2008.Linked to Capital of Culture 2008. Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in Merseyside.
An upgrade scheme that should be programmed early to make best value of existing specialists who have been employed on the phase 1 upgrade due to finish in 2006. Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in East Manchester.
Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in Oldham. Need to take into account urgent maintenance needs of Oldham so funding should be allocated early in the investment programme.
There is a potential for a £5m cost saving if this scheme is constructed concurrently with the A57/A628 Mottram-Tintwistle Bypass. The proposal is for this scheme to be considered at the same public inquiry scheduled for next year. Strong environmental opposition has already been expressed. The intention now is to make the Compulsory Purchase Orders and Side Roads Orders at the end of January 2006 in line with the Highways Agency advertising the orders for the Mottram to Tintwistle Bypass.
Has provisional acceptance from DfT. Linked to Capital of Culture 2008. Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in Merseyside. ERDF Objective 1 looking to provide £3.5m contribution. Scheme needs approval by Dec. 2006 to secure O1 funding.
Original cost assumed to be in 2005 prices. Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in East Lancs.
Linked to improvements by others. This is Cheshire’s second highest priority.
Provides access to regional employment site at Basford. Part funds only. Rest from other sources. Timing is linked to other improvements. May need a reduced level of funding from RFA than indicated.
Comments (eg risks to deliverability or timing, links to housing/ regeneration projects
Encourages public transport use, widens labour markets, links deprived areas into job opportunities and ensures sustainable growth of the Manchester City Region.
Provide key access to the region, Manchester Airport and Manchester City Region but suffer from high levels of congestion
Rochdale Interchange.
SEMMMS Relief Road Scheme.
Q1
Local
Local
Thornton to Switch Island Link.
Yellow School Buses.
Q3
Local
Silver Jubilee Bridge Major Maintenance Scheme.
Encourages public transport use, widens labour markets, links deprived areas into job opportunities and ensures sustainable growth of the Manchester City Region.
Metrolink Extensions.
Q1
Q1
Local
BCR of 19.0 (High VfM)
BCR greater than 15 (High VfM)
Y
Y
BCR of 2.1 (High VfM)
BCR of 5.7 (High VfM)
BCR of 2.4 (High VfM)
BCR of 2.3 (High VfM)
BCR of 2 (High VfM)
BCR of 2.4 (High VfM)
BCR of 1.9 (Medium VfM)
Vfm/BCR (where available)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Northern RTS RES Way Prioritisation
Relieves congestion, supports two strategic regional sites, improves reliability of access to Liverpool airport and improves linkages with the Liverpool City region
Reduces need to travel by car by providing better integrated public transport.
Wider regional objectives
Justification of priority (eg significance in meeting wider regional objectives, strategies and plans)
Mersey Gateway.
M60 JETTS QBC.
Leigh-Salford-Manchester QBC.
Scheme name
Could bring forward if spare funding available in any year
Due to the level of detailed work undertaken for this scheme, it is expected that it could be delivered in line with the timescale identified in the revised investment programme. This scheme has links with the Highways Agency’ Access to Port of Liverpool scheme.
The level of maintenance (and therefore funding required) could reduce if the Mersey Gateway scheme was implemented early and these schemes were considered as a joint package. to Mersey Gateway
A proposed PFI scheme subject to establishing a PFI partner once there is approval to proceed from the DfT. Total cost approx £432m.
A relatively small scheme linked to other urban regeneration within the town centre. Developer contribution at risk if significantly delayed. Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in Rochdale.
Assumed start 2008/09. Only £260m of the required £753m funding is being sought from the RFA. The rest is subject to discussions and agreement over TIF. Later RFA used to re-pay borrowings or TIF monies. Supports the broader aims of the housing market renewal initiatives in East Manchester. Oldham and Rochdale.
PFI Scheme. Total cost approx. £370m Environmentally sensitive issues would need to be addressed at a public inquiry
This consists of a number of different corridors and as such could be split into separate contracts over different timescales to fit in with available funding.
GMPTE is investigating the potential for this scheme to progress via a PFI route. If this is successful, then there would be a reduced call on RFA monies. TWA powers expire in 2010. Need to start on site by late 2009.
Comments (eg risks to deliverability or timing, links to housing/ regeneration projects
Table 3 - Committed Schemes
Committed Schemes (ÂŁm)
2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 Total
LOCAL AUTHORITY Warrington Bus Interchange A58 Black Brook Diversion Metrolink Phase 1&2 Renewal Metrolink Phase 3 Freckleton St Bridge Carlisle Northern Dev Route SEMMMS QBC Northern Orbital QBC Liverpool South Parkway UTC (Warrington) UTC (Greater Manchester) Manchester Salford Inner Relief Route Oldham Retaining Walls A57 Cadishead Way
1 1.68 2 20.5 0.89 5 3.2 2.702 1.05 0.812 5.114 3.5 3.46
5.75 20 3.6 2.91 17.135 5 3.346
1.02 33.5 3.59 24.215 3
1 8.45 58 24.1 8.53 59.4 13 6.546 2.702 1.05 0.812 5.114 3.5 3.71
2.5 1 18.05
0.14
0.25
HIGHWAYS AGENCY A590 High and Low Newton Bypass A66 Temple Sowerby A595 Parton - Lillyhall Improvement A57/A628 Mottram - Hollingworth Tintwistle Total
4.98 7.20 0.70
11.06 18.40 7.19
6.29 13.48 12.80
6.59
4.05 67.842
1 96.442
19.11 117.004
42.71 70.85
22.337 39.08 27.28 35.42 35.56
0
103.09 387.7
29
6.
HOW THE ADVICE WAS PRODUCED
The advice provided is set in the context of all the strategies and policies mentioned previously, and has taken account of the views of a wide range of stakeholders and delivery agents at a variety of spatial levels. There has been a high quality debate about the key priorities, and this response, therefore, represents the response of the region, not simply that of the three key public agencies. GONW supported the process through its role as facilitator, and the drafting process was led by the NWRA. The advice has arisen as a product of consensus, using existing governance and inter-agency working arrangements wherever possible. It has utilised extensive evidence and research to provide integrated, credible advice, consistent with wider national strategy and policies - There have been two levels of activity: • Consideration by thematic groups for each of the three areas: - Economic development - RES Advisory Group - Housing - Regional Housing Board - Transport - Regional Transport Forum • Final advice circulated to the above as well as the Assembly’s Executive Board and the NWDA’s Board for comment and input, and signed-off by the Chairs of the NWRA’s Executive Board and the NWDA In order to reinforce and enhance the region's commitment to sustainable economic development, a detailed sustainability appraisal of the advice was undertaken, using the regionally approved Integrated Appraisal Toolkit.
RES Advisory Group Members
Regional Transport Forum Members
Regional Housing Board Members
Association of Colleges Chambers of Commerce Cheshire & Warrington Economic Alliance CBI Culture Northwest Cumbria Vision English Nature English Partnerships Environment Agency Greater Manchester Forum Institute of Directors Jobcentre Plus Lancashire Economic Partnership The Mersey Partnership Northwest Business Leadership Team NWDA NWRA Northwest Universities Association ONE North West Private Sector Partners Ltd Regional LSC Regional Skills Partnership Strategic Health Authorities TUC Voluntary Sector North West
DfT DfT Rail Highways Agency GMPTA GMPTE GONW Greater Manchester Joint Transport team Local Authorities Merseyside LTP Partnership Merseytravel Northern Way NWDA NWRA
English Partnerships GONW House Builder Housing Corporation Mortgage Lender NWDA NW Housing Forum NWRA
30
Northwest Regional Development Agency PO Box 37 Renaissance House Centre Park Warrington WA1 1XB Tel: +44 (0)1925 400 100 Fax: +44 (0)1925 400 400 e-mail: information@nwda.co.uk
www.nwda.co.uk www.englandsnorthwest.com
North West Regional Assembly Wigan Investment Centre Waterside Drive Wigan WN3 5BA Tel: +44 (0)1942 737916 e-mail: enquiries@nwra.gov.uk
www.nwra.gov.uk
Contact Peter White, Director of Strategy (NWDA) Steve Barwick, Director of Scrutiny, Policy and European Directorate (NWRA)
Designed and Produced by the Northwest Regional Development Agency Marketing Department
20th January 2006 NWDA G1-31