Regional FundingAllocationsThe Advice of the Northwest Region

January 2006

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 3

1.3 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. HOW THE ADVICE WAS PRODUCED 30

Regional Funding AllocationsThe Advice of the Northwest Region

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

We are delighted to submit the Regional Funding Allocations advice of the Northwest region toGovernment.

The Northwest has recently reviewed its Regional Economic Strategy, Regional Housing Strategyand Regional Spatial Strategy. From these reviews the region is very clear about its vision andpriorities. 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 developmentpotential:

• 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 provisionof 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 webelieve 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 transportinfrastructure - 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 thereforeagreed to jointly monitor the progress in implementing all the schemes outlined in this advice. Wealso want to go further, with Government, in making decisions which affect this region andimprove our economy. Specifically we want to talk to Government about:

(a) 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

(b) The availability and use of European Structural Funds post 2006 – to ensure that they are aligned to our strategic priorities to maximise their effectiveness

(c) 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 ifwe are to realise the region’s potential, deliver Northern Way ambitions, contribute fully to theGovernment’s PSA targets, and improve the quality of life for all in the region.

Bryan Gray Peter SmithChairman Chairman, Executive BoardNorthwest Regional Development Agency North West Regional Assembly

1

England’s NorthwestSub-Regions and City-Regions

Motorways

Main Rail Routes

Sub Regional Boundaries

City Regions

Central Lancashire

Manchester

Liverpool

Source: Ordnance Survey, Crown Copyright 2005, All Rights Reserved, GD 021102

2

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 areasbetween 1996 and 2003. However, the region also contains one of the fastest growing areas inEngland 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 isdetermined to maintain this record, achieve sustainable growth, share improved prosperity morewidely 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 andadvanced 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 Cumbria4. 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-leadingmanufacturing industries, such as aerospace; excellent transport facilities including ManchesterAirport, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Port of Liverpool; and a world beating environmentthat 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 socialdevelopment 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 linksustainable economic development opportunities to concentrations of worklessness, as well asboost productivity and enterprise in key sectors and areas.

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.”

3

The NWRA and NWDA as well as GONW have worked closely to develop a clear focus forunderstanding and addressing these three issues. This has included joint commissioning ofresearch, 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 followingwidespread consultation and joint working between regional and sub regional partners. Togetherthese strategies represent a coherent view of future of the region. This document thereforeprovides 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 prioritiesoutlined above, as well as sustainable procurement principles4 . It sets out the region’s aspirationsand 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, aswell as a number of specific consultation exercises with over 30 organisations. It thereforerepresents an emerging commitment to partnership working to secure the best future for theNorthwest.

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’.

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 shownin detail in later sections. The table below shows, in summary form, how these spending prioritiesindividually 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 regionwill pursue in relation to its four strategic priorities. Particularly in relation to EconomicDevelopment, there is a far wider range of actions that the region will pursue, outlined in therevised RES, funding for which is not embraced within the RFA process. In addition EuropeanStructural Funds after 2006 – both the overall amount and its use - are of great importance to allsub regions within the Northwest.

The economic development priorities outlined below, and in the revised RES, have HousingMarket Renewal areas as a key spatial priority for tackling need. In this way they align with thehousing 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 potentialof the Cities / City Regions and connecting areas of opportunity and need. The economicdevelopment priorities deliver the same objectives as well as encouraging economicdevelopment in locations which better use the existing transport infrastructure.

4

MAXIMISE THE GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES PRESENTED BY THE THREE CITIES OFMANCHESTER, LIVERPOOL AND PRESTON, AS KEY DRIVERS OF CITY REGIONALGROWTH

Economic Development Housing Transport

Cluster programmes in prioritysectors

Exploiting opportunities from aMedia Enterprise Zone linked to theBBC relocation

Support Liverpool Capital of Culture2008 to maximise the fulleconomic benefit

Supporting major researchconcentrations

Delivering skills required tomaximise the economic impact ofkey growth opportunities

Supporting people back intoemployment via employability andjob brokerage activities

Encouraging employment creationin or near deprived areas

Setting Housing Market Renewal ina strong economic context

Investment in quality public realmin the cities

Maximise the positive impact ofthe four Housing Renewal“Pathfinders” and emerging lowdemand initiatives within theirbroader housing markets in thesecity regions

Provide additional appropriatehousing to support economicdevelopment (regeneration orknowledge economy) egaffordable housing for key workers

The majority of new housing willbe located in the three city regions– approximately 19,689 per annumnew housing provision (net ofclearance replacement) (set out inDraft RSS)

Create better integrated transportnetworks within and between City-Regions

A556 (M6 to M56) ImprovementGreater Manchester UTCMetrolink ExtensionsBolton Town Centre Public Transport

StrategyLeigh Salford Manchester QBCM60 JETTS QBCSEMMMS Relief RoadsA34 Alderley Edge and Nether

Alderley By-Pass

Access to Port of Liverpool Improvement

Edge Lane / Eastern ApproachesLiverpool Hall Lane Strategic

GatewayMersey Gateway Bidston Moss Viaduct (Maintenance)Thornton – Switch Island LinkSilver Jubilee Bridge (Maintenance)

Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway Upgrade – Phase 1

East Lancashire Rapid Transit

FULLY DEVELOP GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES AROUND KEY REGIONAL TOWNS ANDCITIES OF CREWE, CHESTER, WARRINGTON, LANCASTER AND CARLISLE

Economic Development Housing Transport

Cluster programmes in prioritysectors

Helping businesses to implementprocess and product/serviceinnovation

Supporting major researchconcentrations

Job brokerage linkages betweenthese growth areas and worklesspeople nearby

Delivering Strategic Regional Sites

Delivering the Regional Equality &Diversity Strategy

Ensure new housing supportsregeneration or knowledge basedsustainable economicdevelopment in these fiveimportant key regional towns andcities

Average annual rate of housingprovision (set out in Draft RSS)Crewe and Nantwich 450Chester 417Warrington 380Lancaster 400Carlisle 450

Completion of Heysham to M6Link

Carlisle Northern DevelopmentRoute (committed scheme)

Crewe Green Link RoadCrewe Rail Gateway

Warrington Bus InterchangeUTC (Warrington)

REGENERATE EAST LANCASHIRE, BLACKPOOL, BARROW AND WEST CUMBRIA

Economic Development Housing Transport

Supporting people back intoemployment via employability andjob brokerage activities

Encouraging employment creationin or near deprived areas

Setting Housing Market Renewal ina strong economic context

Investment in quality public realmin the cities

Average annual rate of housingprovision (net of clearancereplacement) (set out in Draft RSS)East Lancashire 1381Blackpool 444West Cumbria 497Barrow 150

Maximise the positive impact ofemerging housing marketrestructuring work in West Cumbriaand Furness

Enhance accessibility to theregion’s principal North-Southtransport corridor therebyencouraging economicdevelopment in peripheral sub-regions of Furness and WestCumbria and connectivity to theCity regions across the north

A66 Temple Sowerby Bypass(committed scheme)

A595 Parton-Lillyhall Improvement(committed scheme)

5

REGENERATE EAST LANCASHIRE, BLACKPOOL, BARROW AND WEST CUMBRIA(continued)

Economic Development Housing Transport

Develop and implement anintegrated economic plan for WestCumbria, including support fornuclear decommissioning activity

Develop and implement the BarrowMaster Plan, including support formarine and leisure developments

Implement the BlackpoolMasterplan, including Blackpool asthe priority location for regionalcasino development in the UK

Develop and implement anintegrated economic plan for EastLancashire including support foradvanced manufacturing

Undertake strategic housingactivity to tackle inappropriatesupply of housing in Blackpooland Morecambe currently actingas a drag on local economicregeneration

Maximise the positive impact ofthe East Lancashire Pathfinderwithin its broader housing market

A590 High and Low Newton By-Pass improving access to Barrow

Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramway

East Lancashire Rapid Transit

ENSURE ONGOING GROWTH IN THE RURAL ECONOMY AS PART OF THE REGIONALRURAL DELIVERY FRAMEWORK

Economic Development Housing Transport

Helping businesses to implementprocess and product/serviceinnovation

Improving business resourceefficiency and waste minimisationsupport

Developing world classmanagement / leadership skills

Investment in quality public realmin key rural service centres

Develop the economic benefit ofthe region’s natural environment

Ensure a sufficient supply ofaffordable housing within ruralareas including parts ofCheshire, Cumbria andLancashire (an increasing priorityover the ten year RFA period)

Average annual rate of housingprovision (set out in Draft RSS)Eden 239South Lakeland 400Lake DistrictNational Park 117

Develop integrated transportnetworks in rural areas based onhubs at key service centres.

A66 Temple Sowerby Bypass(committed scheme)

Outputs

The table below shows indicative headline outputs that the region will achieve over the next 10 yearperiod (2006/7 to 20015/16) from the RFA funding streams. Key transport schemes are not outputsin themselves, but will support delivery of sustainable economic development.

Indicative Outputs

No. of jobs created or safeguardedNo. of businesses createdNo. of people assisted in skillsNo. of dwellings improvedNo. of affordable housing completionsNo. of “committed” transport schemes completedNo. of new transport schemes completed or underway

Number (2006/7 – 20015/16)

140,00022,000

180,00059,00018,000

1825

RFA funding, together with a wider range of public spending, will enable the region to improveits economic performance, maintain GVA growth above the UK average, and achieve theeconomic targets set out in the revised RES.

1

1

23

4

5

6

7

8

910

1112

13

14

15

1617

18

19

20

21

23

22

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

37

38

39

4041

42

43

44

45

47

46

36

Wrexham

Deeside

1

Proposed HMR Area of West Cumbria and Furness

Guide to locationsRegional Funding Allocations

Source: Ordnance Survey, Crown Copyright, All Rights Reserved. GD 021102.

6

7

KEY

Regional ParksEast Lancashire

Ribble Estuary

Wigan Greenheart

Mersey Waterfront

Weaver Valley

Northwest Coastal Trail

Strategic Regional SitesAshton Moss, TamesideBasford, CreweCuerden Regional Business Park,Preston/LeylandDaresbury Park, HaltonKingmoor, CarlisleKings Business Park, KnowsleyKingsway, RochdaleOmega South, WarringtonRoyal Ordnance Factory, ChorleyThe Estuary, Speke/GarstonWirral International Business ParkBarton, SalfordTwelve Quays, BirkenheadWhitebirk, LancashireCarrington, TraffordChester Business ParkDavenport Green, TraffordDitton, WidnesLancaster University/BailriggLiverpool University EdgeCentral Park, ManchesterParkside Former Colliery, St HelensLiverpool Science Park (Edge Lane)Westlakes, WhitehavenAlderley Park (Astra Zeneca),Macclesfield

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Transport Priorities

1. Macclesfield 2. Crewe and Nantwich 3. Chester4. Ellesmere Port and

Neston 5. Congleton 6. Vale Royal7. 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. Hyndburn 24. Burnley 25. Bolton 26. Bury 27. Knowsley 28. Liverpool 29. Manchester 30. Oldham 31. Rochdale 32. Salford 33. Sefton 34. Stockport 35. St. Helens 36. Tameside 37. Trafford 38. Wigan 39. Wirral 40. Blackburn with

Darwen 41. Blackpool 42. Halton 43. Warrington

Northwest Regionboundary

New Heartlands HMR

East Lancashire HMR

Oldham Rochdale HMR

Manchester Salford HMR

Urban RegenerationCompanies (URC) Areas

HMR and URC Areas

Northwest Motorways

Airports

Key Ports

Key Towns and Cities

Lake District NationalPark

Hadrian’s Wall

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Warrington Bus InterchangeA58 Black Brook DiversionMetrolink Phase 1&2 RenewalMetrolink Phase 3Freckleton St BridgeCarlisle Northern Development RouteSEMMMS QBCNorthern Orbital QBCLiverpool South ParkwayUTC (Warrington)UTC (Greater Manchester)Manchester Salford Inner ReliefRouteOldham Retaining WallsA57 Cadishead WayA590 High and Low Newton BypassA66 Temple Sowerby BypassA595 Parton - Lillyhall ImprovementA57/A628 Mottram - Hollingworth -Tintwistle

A34 Alderley Edge and NetherAlderley BypassA556 (M6 to M56) ImprovementAccess to port of LiverpoolImprovementAshton Northern Bypass Stage 2Bidston Moss Viaduct (Jn.1 M53)Blackpool and Fleetwood TramwayUpgrade Phase 1Bolton Town Centre Public TransportStrategyCompletion of Heysham to M6 linkCrewe Green Link Road SouthernSectionCrewe Rail GatewayEast Lancashire Rapid TransitEdge Lane/Eastern ApproachesGlossop SpurGreater Manchester AuthoritiesHighway Retaining WallsStrengthening SchemeGreater Manchester Urban TrafficControl (GMUTC)Hall Lane Strategic GatewayLeigh-Salford-Manchester QBCM60 JETTS QBCMersey GatewayMetrolink ExtensionsRochdale InterchangeSEMMMS Relief Road SchemeSilver Jubilee Bridge MajorMantenance SchemeThornton to Switch Island LinkYellow School Buses

A55T/A483T Junction ImprovementA685 Kirby Stephen BypassAltrincham InterchangeWigan Inner Relief Road

Local Authority Areas

Note: Locations are indicative only

Committed Schemes

Schemes Recommended for Funding

Contingency Schemes

Areas of slowest GVA growth in the UK 1996-2003

Areas of fastest GVA growth in the UK 1996-2003

8

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 regionto meet its ambitions and deliver increased GVA.

£678m could be used to build, refurbish and/or clear many more hundreds of houses; and/or todeliver the four contingency transport schemes identified; and/or to speed up implementation ofeconomic development plans. The opportunity such increased funding affords to act as a catalystfor even higher levels of investment, for example through “match funding” European StructuralFunds, is highly important in the region.

The region is committed to working together to ensure any increased funding would be properlyappraised 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 thepriorities identified through an evidence based approach. In particular the three-year regionalhousing pot funding over the period 2005/05 to 2007/08 represents a reduction in funds in realterms for the region, taking inflation into account. This, combined with insufficient and short termfunding 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. TheNorthwest already faces many institutional biases when compared with southern English regionsfor public sector investment, for example research and development. A reduction in fundingwould negatively impact on GVA growth, hinder the regeneration of key areas, impact badly onvunerable groups and have an impact of greater than 10% due to consequential reductions inlevered funds including from the private sector. The region would work together to properlyappraise and decide how to deal with any decreased funding, rather than simply applying thesame percentage cut to all 3 funding areas.

Similarly any reduction in the other public funding streams outside of the RFA process would beof great concern to the region. These currently provide more than £55 billion of public resourceeach year, of which the Regional Funding Allocation is less than 2%. However, the effectivenessof all of this public investment will be maximised if it is deployed to further the vision and prioritiesagreed 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 fundsallocated. It is also about what the region can do in the future to make the RFA process evenmore effective and what central Government could do to assist what we believe should becomean ongoing process. There are a number of issues on which we believe the region and theGovernment 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 currentRFA request for advice, the inclusion of all transport schemes above £5 million meant thatprojects that were not of regional significance but costing above this had to be considered. Theregion wants to make informed choices about regional issues but those that are sub regional oreven local should be left to their respective decision makers. In general that will mean asubstantially higher threshold than £5 million. A mechanism for determining the allocation of fundsat the sub regional level for those schemes costing less than the new threshold would clearlyalso need to be developed.

The second is the availability and use of European Structural Funds post 2006. This is a majorissue for the region, currently the largest UK regional recipient of Structural funds. The Northwestis seeking a significant allocation of funds, along with flexibility in their use, to boost our

9

sustainable economic development. There are the related issue of State Aids, including RegionalAid Guidelines, and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. Aligning these threepolicy 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 growingparts of the UK and has been hard hit by the decline in its traditional manufacturing base and byrestructuring of the rural economy. Nuclear decommissioning is a further challenge. Unlike otherparts of the Northwest, it is not close to centres of economic growth and needs support throughthe 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 regionacross domains that have usually been treated separately - is an important first step towards thedevelopment of an integrated regional framework for the Northwest, grounded in the principles ofsustainable development. This will be considered in more detail by partners in the coming yearbut would provide the overarching high-level policy framework for the region, building on thecommon 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 forpartnership working bringing together the NWRA, NWDA and other partners. Likewise the regionwill 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 aboutregional and sub-regional schemes and looks forward to establishing a Transport Board as soonas possible (as well as Passenger Transport Authorities for those sub regions without them.) Thiswould enable the region to address key issues such as demand management and considerationof 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 Compactto 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 andquarterly monitoring of all the schemes outlined in RFA. This will include agreeing adjustments toschemes subject to progress on the ground. In this way the region will be able to ensure overalldelivery 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 RFAprocess, to increase the potential of aligning strategies and maximising the effectiveness of publicexpenditure. The region supports the inclusion of all the current RFA funds, but feels there aresome significant omissions, such as funding for skills development, and rail infrastructure andfranchise funding.

Skills policy is a key contributor to regional economic performance – skills and education is oneof the five thematic priorities of the new RES - and there is already considerable working byregional partners to deliver better skills policy through the Regional Skills Partnership and SectorSkills & Productivity Alliances.

The region is disappointed that rail expenditure is excluded from the RFA, but welcomes thecommitment to include this in any future RFA guidance. The region also believes that theTransport Innovation Fund should be included within RFA.

10

On housing, our view is that Housing Market Renewal funding should be included within theregional housing allocation as a ring fenced allocation. This is due to the centrality of Pathfindersto the Housing Strategy in the region and will ensure far greater alignment and integration of HMRwith the housing, economic development and transport elements of RFA.

The RES identifies £72 billion available to the region between 2006/07 - 2008/09 for economicdevelopment and regeneration. The NWDA budget forms a relatively small part of this. The RFAGuidance indicates that budgets such as European funds, English Partnerships funding andgrowth area funding could be considered for inclusion within future RFA arrangements. TheNorthwest would welcome this.

There will be £95 billion of other public expenditure over the same period in areas such aseducation, health and rural, and these sums could all be better focused in support of agreedregional priorities. Funding for community safety, public health and culture are key components ofsustainable 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 decisionsregarding future investment in this region and, over time, a more co-ordinated spatial dimensionto its decisions. The Northern Way has made a start, by emphasising the importance andcentrality to the north of the Manchester-Leeds belt, and developing service activities andtransport linkages which support that role, as well as connectivity with other city regions. Thisclearly supports Manchester’s position as a capital city for the northern knowledge economy aswell as the Manchester Science City initiative. In addition the Mersey Ports represent the north’sinternational sea “Gateway” and improved access is now recognised as one of the threeinvestment priorities for the Northern Way.

Improved performance and output in the Northwest, for the benefit of the UK as a whole, requiressupport from national level policies. For example, if the Government presses ahead with plans forthe concentration of research funding in a limited number of leading institutions, there is a strongcase for channelling continued investment into the new Manchester University, to ensure that theNorth has at least one university in the top twenty in the world, as well as other universities in theregion with world class reputations in particular fields. Likewise Liverpool Capital of Culture shouldbe 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 servicerelocation to the Northwest. The benefits afforded by the relocation of the BBC to GreaterManchester should act as a spur to other substantial relocations. There are a number of locationalopportunities in the region, which, for example, could assist in key regeneration programmes andcapitalise on high quality ICT based infrastructure. Such interventions would enable the region toclose 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 withthe 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 andeffective use of the funds to achieve the overall objectives that the region is pursuing throughRFA 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 affordablehousing. The region’s local housing authorities would therefore like to recycle capital receipts (asis possible in Pathfinder areas) and make greater use of planning powers to deliver affordablehousing. One model for exploring these issues further would be through greater freedoms andflexibilities for Local Area Agreements / Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. The region would beinterested in designating pilot areas for further initiatives to deliver affordable housing.

The second brake on growth identified was ineffective key transport infrastructure. The transport

11

spending priorities are aimed at maximising the potential of the Cities / City Regions andconnecting areas of opportunity and need, as well as encouraging economic development inlocations which better use the existing transport infrastructure. The region would encourageGovernment 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 majortransport 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 networkimprovements, to better relate the rail industry to customer needs

• reviewing the structure of Bus Quality Contracts, particularly regarding the issue ofcompensation where markets are failing, and opportunities for franchise arrangements. Greaterflexibility 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 wereidentified as the third brake on growth. The NWDA will therefore continue to work withGovernment 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. Itcovers the budget of the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) and has beenprepared in consultation with its partners.

Sustainable economic development remains a major priority for the region and this is reflected inthe recently updated Regional Economic Strategy (RES). At £98 billion GVA, it is the UK’s thirdlargest 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 thanthe 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 parttime.

In the past, manufacturing companies dominated the Northwest economy but its structure isbecoming increasingly similar to that of the country as a whole. Manufacturing is still veryimportant to the Northwest however and tends to have above average productivity. The majorityof the GVA gap is in the service sector, particularly business and professional services.

The updated RES sets out a very clear vision for the region – “to create a dynamic, sustainableinternational economy which competes on the basis of knowledge, advanced technology and asuperb 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 improveproductivity and grow the market, building on its areas of success and its particular assets andopportunities to increase GVA per person employed. This means increasing the added value ofjobs 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 peopleworking and specifically encouraging all forms of economic activity in our most deprived areas,areas remote from growth and amongst our most disadvantaged communities. This meansensuring that people from these communities have the skills required to work, linking people tojob opportunities and by encouraging new enterprise activity.

Thirdly, these two major drivers need to be underpinned by creating and monitoring the conditionsfor sustainable growth and private sector investment. This means investment in the region’senvironmental culture and infrastructure (especially to link growth areas with more deprivedcommunities), improving the quality of life, tackling deprivation, valuing diversity and socialinclusion and recognising the social and environmental implications of economic growth.

A detailed explanation of the relationship between the three drivers and the factors and objectivesthat influence them is given in the revised RES. This also shows how these priorities are clearlylinked to the national policy agenda and reinforce Government objectives across a range of policyareas 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) reference to the existing NWDA Corporate Plan (2005/06 - 2007/8) for the two year period 2006/7 to 2007/8; and

(b) by reference to the new RES and those transformational actions which are appropriate forNWDA funding for the eight year period 2008/9 to 2015/16.

12

13

The priorities for funding outlined are all designed to support the transformation of the Northwesteconomy 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 (tocommence in April 2006). Also, the Agency’s Strategic Investment Plan (SIP) 2006/7-2008/9 iscurrently under preparation, as is the updating of the Agency’s spending priorities in the light ofthe new RES. Both are expected to be approved by the Agency Board in March 2006. Thereforethe final details of the priorities set out below are subject to confirmation in the light of theseprocesses.

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 to2007/08. 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 areupdated annually and this update will be completed for 2006/7 as part of the revisedSIP/spending priorities process. However, the existing Corporate Plan shows the followingestimated outputs:

14

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 UKknowledge 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

14,000

925

2,150

12,000

565

37050%

370

17,500

2,050

1,230

2007/8

14,500

950

2,200

12,300

580

38030%

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 REShas been endorsed by Ministers and is likely to lead to some reclassification of projects betweenthe 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 exclusivein terms of addressing issues. Regeneration expenditure, for example, includes substantialactivity to support business development and skills.

The draft SIP re-categorises existing agency commitments into the activity split of the new 5 RESchapters, updating the figures in the Corporate Plan, as follows:

Programme (£m) 2006/07 2007/08

Business 148 131Skills 4 1People and Jobs 112 81Infrastructure 91 92Quality of Life 69 62Legacy RES 61 33Unallocated Resources 17 96

TOTAL 502 496

Priorities for unallocated resources will be determined by the SIP/spending priorities processcurrently underway, referred to above and due to be approved by the Agency Board in March2006.

NWDA is only a small part of the funding available for economic development priorities. Weestimate that over this two-year period, the region will receive around £48billion for economicdevelopment and regeneration, of which £30billion is funding within the scope and influence ofthe RES and sub-region / city region action plans.

5 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.

5

15

This includes substantial European funding, which will continue on present arrangements until theend of this period. Uncertainty over the future European funding arrangements continues but theRES and these priorities provide a clear basis for its effective utilisation of any such funds in thefuture.

(b) The eight year period 2008/09 to 2015/16

The longer term priorities for economic development funding will be increasingly focused aroundthe six Transformational Outcomes, set out in the revised RES and specifically the 45Transformational Actions which support them.

The Agency is currently reviewing its spending priorities in the light of the new RES and thisprocess 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 problematicsince 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 developmentactivity 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 period2008/09 to 2015/6 would provide an NWDA budget for economic development of £3.5 billion.

16

In the absence of realistic alternative assumptions, NWDA spending figures have been projectedforward 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 3551

4 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) publishedin July 2005 and is based on our understanding that the key role for regional housing pot fundingin the region is to intervene in those areas where the market is not functioning well therebyhelping 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 andclearance. Alongside housing stock issues and areas of market weaknesses there are also manyareas – “hot spots” - where affordability is a significant and growing issue and is acting as a breakto the growth of the local and regional economy.

The overall vision within the regionally agreed Housing Strategy is of “a region working together todeliver a housing offer that will promote and sustain maximum economic growth, ensuring allresidents can access a choice of good quality housing in successful, secure and sustainablecommunities.”

The objectives for housing intervention are therefore to provide decent homes and sustaincommunities; support and lead regeneration in areas of greatest deprivation and providingaffordable housing where the market is ‘over heating’, in order to underpin the economic successof the region.

The four Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder projects already established within the Northwestand 3 other low demand initiatives being developed are regarded as being absolutely essentialfor the economic and social development plans of the region and key to delivering our strategicpriorities. The RFA process is vital to support our spending priorities in the region both throughthe Regional Housing Pot and Housing Market Renewal funding. As will be seen later, asignificant part of the RHP funds allocated will be used to support Housing Market Renewalprojects and we provide advice about future funding needs of the Housing Market Renewalinitiatives at the conclusion of this section.

The following key priorities determined by the Regional Housing Strategy are, in order ofimportance:

• Housing Priority 1 – Delivering urban renaissance through Pathfinders and other schemes• Housing Priority 2 – Providing affordable homes to maintain balanced communities• Housing Priority 3 – Delivering decent homes in thriving neighbourhoods• Housing Priority 4 –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 draftRSS - that the total number of new dwellings to be provided in the Northwest is 403,060 over the

17

period 2003 to 2021 with an approximate annual average rate of 22,392 up from the current levelof 17 to 20,000. However much of each year’s new provision will be provided by the private sectorwithout 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 strongbuy-in from regional partners/stakeholders. The Priorities have been determined through the sixmonth RHS review process. The Regional Housing Board, working closely with regional, sub-regional and local stakeholders commissioned research to build understanding of the localhousing markets; reviewed the impact of previous interventions; considered changes in thenational and regional policy context; and held three wide ranging consultation exercises. As aresult of this, the priorities originally identified in 2003 were refined, but not substantially alteredand are widely regarded as appropriate and realistic.

Market changes however, make it difficult to forecast with any degree of accuracy so we have hadto assume that the housing markets in the Northwest will continue to perform much as they haveover the past few years, with house prices continuing to increase albeit at a slower rate. We havealso had to assume that progress towards delivering the PSA and HMR targets will continue onthe current trajectory. All of this means that the balance of priorities set out in this paper, and theassociated outputs, must be seen as our current best estimate. They will need to be reviewedregularly and thoroughly to ensure that they remain appropriate and that we are achieving thebest value for money.

Finally, we have assumed that resources for the Regional Housing Pot (RHP) will remain at currentlevels, currently £249 million a year, plus inflation. We are confident that our proposals make thebest use of this resource although the recent allocation for the Northwest regional housing potwas a disappointment as we were the only English region not to see an increase over and abovethe current level. There are concerns that this will not allow us to tackle all the many and multiplehousing 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 greaterflexibilities 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 HousingBoard will be well placed to undertake further work on these matters as well as makerepresentations 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 theirbroader 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 andadapting lessons from the Pathfinders.

The rationale underpinning this priority is that the Northwest has the highest concentrations ofhousing market weakness in the country (in excess of 400,000 homes in HMR areas). Whilsthouse prices have generally risen strongly in the region, the gap between the strongest andweakest markets has actually increased and there are concerns that speculative purchasing byinvestors and by the increase in the “buy to let” market mean that even those price rises attainedin low demand areas are not sustainable yet consequently this may impact on scheme deliveryeg through use of compulsory purchase orders.

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 theNorthwest 2002-2004 - in 2002 the median house price was £70,000 and by the end of 2004 thishad risen to £106,100. Prices levelled off in the first half of 2005 but income growth has not kept paceand as higher priced areas continue to experience the greatest increases, the gap between higherand lower priced areas has widened.

It is recognised that affordable housing will also be provided for as an integral part of delivery ofPriority 1 in the urban renaissance areas (above) as well as in the more traditional high demand areassuch as the Lake District and Cheshire, but this advice moves resource towards high demand areasin 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 bothpublic and private sector housing stock. The great majority of our LAs have now transferred their stockor set up an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) to achieve the 2010 target for all publicsector stock to meet a decent standard. More than 100,000 Northwest public sector properties arecurrently non-decent but by 2010 this figure is expected to fall dramatically to 15,000 given theprojected levels of funding. This is a considerable achievement, which illustrates the ability of regionalpartners to respond to Government policy.

The 70% target for private sector decency for vulnerable households is less certain as we do notcurrently have robust baseline data against which to measure progress. ODPM estimates suggest inexcess of 400,000 vulnerable households in the private sector, of whom almost half are in non-decentproperties. ODPM suggest that the average cost of bringing a property in the private sector up to adecent standard would cost £9,000. This presents the region with a significant challenge to bring140,000+ properties at a cost of £9,000 per unit up to Decent Homes standards by 2010. We willalso need to ensure that decency is maintained once the PSA target is met; and will need to considerhow best to achieve this. Whilst we are well advanced as a region in developing equity sharing loansfor this kind of work, this is still a young policy area and it is not yet clear how well the anticipatedcapital recycling will work in practice.

Housing Priority 4 – Meeting the needs of communities and providing support for those whoneed it

• To ensure that action under Priorities 1 – 3 contributes to meeting the housing needs ofthe 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 housingthat meets their needs, but for some individuals or communities a lack of appropriate housing can bea contributory factor to social exclusion. The Regional Housing Board is clear that this affects theoverall success of the region in addition to the impact it has on individuals and their families. Supportfor action that will mean that everyone, whatever their circumstances, has access to a home thatmeets their needs is therefore specifically included as a priority for the region, although action willmostly 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 Authoritiesand 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 Priority4 activities.

18

We propose to maintain the split between Local Authorities and Housing Corporation for theforeseeable future and the subdivision between priorities. We will however review this in the lightof housing market intelligence and progress made against priorities. In particular we are awarethat 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 ofthe 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, mayneed to grow further.

Allocations through to 2007/08 have been made on a formula basis taking account of 2005/06allocations and agreed by ODPM Ministers. For allocations post 2007/08 the Board proposes toreview this methodology to enable better value for money evaluations to be made and toencourage new funding models and partnership delivery. In addition, we will ensure that allavailable non-resource tools are developed and employed. These will include: planning tools andpowers we have to develop appropriate solutions; opportunities presented by new forms of tenuresuch as equity sharing and homebuy; the development of Real Estate Investment Trusts; possiblenew roles for the best ALMOs and optimising the effectiveness of the existing stock throughinitiatives such as empty property strategies and private sector landlord licensing. We will alsoencourage efficiency savings that can then be redeployed, but this is unlikely to yield major sumsquickly. We will also ensure that in implementing RHS a robust evidence base with up to datehousing market intelligence is developed, working with partners in the region.

c) Housing Outputs

Figures for outputs from the programmes are very difficult to estimate due to the complexity of themultiple issues being tackled and the current lack of robust baseline evidence and up to datestatistics on private sector decency. Most parts of the region are tackling housing issues using amultitude of funding streams, including NDC and NRF money: this makes it impossible to drawout only those outputs that HMR and/or RHP money is funding. The estimates given below arebased on recent activity rates extrapolated against RHP funding assumptions:

All figures are in £million

2006/7 – 2007/8

2008/9 – 2010/11

2011/12– 2015/16

Total

LocalAuthorities

(Priorities 1&3)

274

427

772

1473

HousingCorporation

(Priority 2)

224

350

631

1205

Total

274

427

772

1473

Regional Housing Pot funding

All Areas (excluding HMR funding)Number of dwellings improved

3,000

1,500

0

4,500

2006/7 – 2007/8

2008/9 – 2010/11

2011/12– 2015/16

Total

9,500

15,000

27,000

51,500

12,500

19,500

27,000

59,000

19

6 These figures are for RHP funded activity only – most activity will be funded from ALMO/RSL funds7 5% assumed

In terms of affordable housing we can expect the number of units to be provided to also remainbroadly similar to recent past trends, with some adjustment for efficiency savings7.

Public 6 Private Total

d) Advice on Housing Market Renewal

The success of the HMR Pathfinders in the Northwest is absolutely central not only to the deliveryof the RHS but also the RES, Northern Way Growth Strategy and for the Sustainable CommunitiesPlan itself. Therefore the four Pathfinders together with other low demand areas, including WestCumbria and Furness, will remain the region’s highest spatial priority and funding provided via theRFA 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 Updatescurrently being evaluated by GO-NW and ODPM. All of the Northwest Pathfinder Scheme Updatesshow 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. Theprogrammes together -including proposals being drawn up by the Greater Manchester andMerseyside Local Authorities for two additional low demand areas - show the following estimatedHMR funding requirements:

Estimated affordable housingcompletions (based on pastbuild rates) Social rented Other, including

Low Cost HomeOwnership

Total

Number of affordable housing units

2,491

3,739

6,900

13,130

2006/07 – 2007/08

2008/09 – 2010/11

2011/12 – 2015/16

Total

1,244

1,002

3,000

5,246

3,735

4,741

9,900

18,376

Total HMR funding HMR funding pa

£204m

£283m

£270m

-

Years

£408m

£567m

£1,620m

£2,615m

2006/07 – 2007/08

2008/09 – 2010/11

2011/12 – 2015/16

Total

Based on this renewal programme, the following output in the HMR areas may be expected:

Cleared Refurbished9

HMR Areas – Outputs/ Number Of Dwellings8

6,947

6,386

12,564

25,897

2006/7 – 2007/8

2008/9 – 20010/11

2011/12 – 2015/16

Total

16,278

15,722

14,358

46,358

8 Includes a small number of public sector homes. Outputs are from the programme as a whole which includes HMR and RHP funds

9 Some of this activity will also contribute to public and private sector decency targets

20

21

However, advice from ODPM has suggested that it is unlikely that additional resources will bemade available above the current £204m pa (plus inflation). Whilst there may be some room fornegotiating efficiency savings, this is unlikely to make much impact on the shortfall in ourexpectations, and there is little scope for finding more funding from the RHP since the greatmajority of that funding already goes to the Pathfinders and other HMR areas. Moreover, giventhat affordability is a growing issue for the region, the option of moving money from new provisionto improving existing stock is not feasible.

In the absence of an increase in current levels, the most likely scenario would be spendingre-profiled over a longer timescale, thus slowing the rate of delivery and reducing options foraltering the balance of spending between priorities post 2010. This situation is untenable andcannot 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 strongdesire to support the Pathfinders and other areas through Housing Market Renewal funding in linewith their expectations, as set out in the profile above. In doing so we would expect additionalfunding to be made available, increasing from the current level of £204m a year to £283m a yearby 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, onerunning 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 locatedwithin these corridors. Collectively, these corridors and gateways, together with regional and sub-regional 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 moreprosperous and inclusive region.

As a result of substantial investment over the last 50 years, the region has one of the mostextensive motorway networks in the UK. However, it also suffers from the highest trunk roadcongestion outside London. On parts of the motorway network, worsening journey time reliabilityis a major problem, particularly for business and industry. In urban areas, congestion is reducingthe reliability of road-based public transport. Elsewhere, the main issues relate to road safety, andthe 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 thecountry, helped by the recent completion of the West Coast Main Line upgrade and the fleetreplacement programme currently being progressed by First TransPennine Express. The regionalso boasts the most intensive local rail network outside the South East; however, the quality ofmany local services and infrastructure leaves much to be desired, and congestion on some railroutes, both in terms of the number of trains and passengers, is now a serious concern. On theother hand, there are opportunities to improve both the quality and capacity of mass transitsystems, including better links within and between city regions.

(b) Key objectives

The draft Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) clearly identifies that local authorities, the HighwaysAgency, the rail industry and other transport providers will need to work together to ensure thatthe Northwest’s transport networks are planned, managed, operated and improved in anintegrated context. The draft RTS also sets out eight objectives to help deliver a transport systemfor the future, of which the following provide a summary:

• Improve journey time reliability and tackle congestion on the region’s principal North-South and East-West transport corridors.

• Develop effective, integrated transport networks within, to and between City Regions.

22

• 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 anexercise to prioritise local authority major schemes (ie schemes costing over £5m) and thoseHighways Agency schemes not on routes of strategic national importance, and to develop aninvestment programme to deliver these priorities.

The prioritisation framework involved a two-stage assessment process. The first stage assessedschemes against: regional, sub-regional and local policy criteria, grouped by economy, socialinclusion and the environment. The regional criteria were derived from those developed by JMPConsulting on behalf of the NWRA for the purpose of developing a methodology for determiningregional transport priorities to be included in the Regional Transport Strategy. The criteria includeda number that are related to the delivery of PSAs e.g. the economic criteria included ones relatingto improving business competitiveness, the support of business clusters, improving international,national and regional trade connections. The social criteria looked at support for housing renewalareas, sustainable growth in urban and rural areas and accessibility. The environment criteriaaddressed issues such as air quality and the best use of existing resources. The sub-regionaland 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 basedon existing DfT guidance and included criteria on benefit/cost ratio (BCR) and private sectorcontributions. The deliverability criteria took into consideration factors such as the affordability of ascheme, risk factors and statutory processes. The final policy framework and value formoney/deliverability criteria are included in the separate report from Atkins. Value for moneyassumptions 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 onepoint (lowest score) and seven points (highest score) against each criterion. An element of theconsultant’s professional judgment was required when scoring a scheme against some of thecriteria.

(d) Weightings

The final appraisal framework contained 28 policy criteria and nine value for money anddeliverability criteria. In order to guide the development of a realistic investment programme, thevalue for money and deliverability criteria were weighted so that they accounted for 50% of thetotal marks available.

The three strands of policy criteria (economy, environment and social) were given two differentweightings. First, they were weighted equally, ie one third each. The weightings were thenadjusted to give a 50% weighting in favour of the economic criteria, reflecting the overarchingobjective of the RFA process to help improve economic performance and reduce the region’s

23

£13bn GVA productivity gap; environment and social criteria were weighted equally at 25%. Resultsshowed that only one scheme moved in or out of the top quartile as a result of using the twodifferent policy weighting scenarios, confirming the robustness of the methodology The RegionalTransport 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 theirassessment score, with approximately 25 schemes in each quartile. Schemes within the topquartile 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 theintention is that this will be included in the future. Station and interchange improvements can befunded through the RFA, and a number of such schemes were included in the prioritisationexercise. Certain infrastructure and franchise schemes were also included in response tocomments received from some local authorities who considered it important to understand how railschemes 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, theOlive Mount Chord and the St. Helens Central - Junction rail link fell in Quartile 2. It should bestressed, however, that this was not a comprehensive exercise to prioritise all rail schemes in theregion, and there other potential schemes which would need to be considered when rail funding isincluded 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 isreassuring to note that there is around an 80% correlation with the priorities identified in the RTSwork and those identified in the RFA exercise. Discrepancies are accounted for by the fact that theRTS 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 bythe Northern Way (which focus on North-South and East-West links and access to ports andairports). 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 FundingAllocations. The region has not assumed that TIF will support any particular scheme. Governmentshould note that the promoters of the Manchester Metrolink Phase 3 are seeking TIF resources tosupport the expansion plans. The total funding sought for Manchester Metrolink from the RFA hasbeen 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 costprofiles were not feasible within the annual allocations. The investment programme thereforesuggests that if Metrolink were to secure TIF funding, it could undertake prudential borrowing tofund expenditure in line with its proposed profile. The “re-imbursement” costs could then befunded 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 fullyapproved schemes and four HA schemes in the TPI with projected start dates before 2008. Asthese schemes were considered as committed, subject to statutory processes, they were notprioritised in the exercise. (These schemes are outlined in table 3).

24

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 A58Blackbrook Diversion and Warrington Bus Interchange). They also announced that MerseytramLine 1 could not proceed. (Merseytravel have been granted a judicial review of this decision andshould this lead to a change in the Government’s decision then the region will need to review itsadvice.) All of the remaining schemes with provisional approval, with the exception of WiganInner 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, allscheme costs were converted to 2005 prices using the Retail Price Index to represent priceinflation, and any optimisation bias was removed. As scheme outturn costs were not commonlyavailable, these 2005 prices were also used in the expenditure profiles. The region accepts thatinflation will have some impact on the affordability of the overall proposed investment programmein later years. The region would like to engage in a constructive dialogue with the Departmentwhen future schemes come forward for approval regarding the implications of any schemeinflation costs.

The initial spend was heavily frontloaded for 2008/09 and 2009/10. Atkins attempted to smoothout the investment profile by considering which schemes could be implemented later or phasedover more years. Scheme promoters were consulted on these revised profiles to ensure that theystill 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 thelarge degree of existing commitments. This small overspend is offset against the underspend in05/06.

(g) Procurement assumptions

Total scheme costs were included in the value for money and deliverability assessment. Thereare two large schemes looking for PFI funding: Mersey Gateway and the South East ManchesterMulti Modal Study Relief Roads. However, only the conventional funding element of theseschemes is included in the investment programme. If PFI approval is not forthcoming, both theseschemes, and any others seeking PFI, will need to be re-assessed. The region recognises that forall schemes over £40m, 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 finaldecisions can be made. It is recognised that not all regional priorities may gain approval and theregion has therefore identified a number of contingency schemes that can be brought forward forfunding. These schemes were identified as those at the top of Quartile two and comprise:Altrincham Interchange, A55/A483 Chester Business Park Junction Improvement, Wigan InnerRelief Road and the A685 Kirkby Stephen by-pass.

Sch

eme

Tota

l sch

eme

cost

s ar

e no

t sh

ow

n -

onl

y th

e am

oun

t re

qui

red f

rom

the

Reg

iona

l Fun

din

g A

lloca

tion

is s

how

n

NO

TE: A

ll co

sts

have

had

opt

imis

m b

ias

rem

oved

(on

the

adv

ice

of D

fT)

and

are

stan

dard

ised

to

200

5 pr

ices

for

com

paris

on p

urpo

ses

Tabl

e 1

- In

vest

men

t pr

ogra

mm

e or

dere

d al

phab

etic

ally

Pro

mot

ing

Aut

hori

ty20

05/0

620

06/0

720

07/0

820

08/0

920

09/1

020

10/1

120

11/1

220

12/1

320

13/1

420

14/1

520

15/1

620

16/1

720

17/1

8R

FAFu

ndin

g(m

illio

ns)

A34

Ald

erle

y Ed

ge a

nd N

ethe

rAld

erle

y B

ypas

s.A

556

(M6

to M

56)

Impr

ovem

ent.

Acc

ess

to P

orto

fLiv

erpo

ol Im

prov

emen

t.A

shto

n N

orth

ern

Byp

ass

Sta

ge 2

.B

idst

on M

oss

Viad

uct(

Junc

tion

1of

the

M53

mot

orw

ay).

Bla

ckpo

ol a

nd F

leet

woo

d Tr

amw

ay U

pgra

de –

Pha

se 1

.B

olto

n To

wn

Cen

tre P

ublic

Tra

nspo

rtS

trate

gyC

ompl

etio

n of

Hey

sham

to M

6 Li

nk.

Cre

we

Gre

en L

ink

Roa

d (S

outh

ern

Sec

tion)

.C

rew

e R

ail G

atew

ay.

East

Lanc

ashi

re R

apid

Tra

nsit.

Edge

Lan

e/Ea

ster

n A

ppro

ache

s.G

loss

op S

pur.

Gre

ater

Man

ches

terA

utho

ritie

s H

ighw

ay R

etai

ning

Wal

ls

Stre

ngth

enin

g S

chem

e.

Gre

ater

Man

ches

terU

rban

Tra

ffic

Con

trol (

GM

UTC

).H

all L

ane

Stra

tegi

c G

atew

ay.

Leig

h-S

alfo

rd-M

anch

este

rQB

C.

M60

JET

TS Q

BC

.M

erse

y G

atew

ay.

Met

rolin

kEx

tens

ions

.R

ochd

ale

Inte

rcha

nge.

SEM

MM

S R

elie

fRoa

d S

chem

e.S

ilver

Jubi

lee

Brid

ge M

ajor

Mai

nten

ance

Sch

eme.

Thor

nton

to S

witc

h Is

land

Lin

k.Ye

llow

Sch

ool B

uses

.To

tal N

ew (

up to

201

5/16

)To

tal C

om

mitt

edTo

tal E

stim

ated

Spen

d (

up to

201

5/16

)R

egio

nal A

lloca

tion/

Pla

nnin

g A

ssum

ptio

nD

iffer

ence

(ne

gativ

e fig

ure

deno

tes

annu

al o

vers

pend

)

Che

shire

Hig

hway

s A

genc

yH

ighw

ays

Age

ncy

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Mer

seys

ide

Bla

ckpo

olG

reat

erM

anch

este

rLa

ncas

hire

Che

shire

Che

shire

Bla

ckbu

rn w

ith D

arw

enM

erse

ysid

eG

reat

erM

anch

este

rG

reat

erM

anch

este

r

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Mer

seys

ide

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Hal

ton

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

Hal

ton

Mer

seys

ide

Gre

ater

Man

ches

ter

67.8

42

67.8

42

113

45.15

8

5 9 1 8 1.5 24.5

96.4

42

120.9

42

115

-5.9

42

1 5 6.8

1 1.5 4.5

1 2.5 23.3

117.0

04

140.3

04

117

-23.

304

12 5 3 1 1.5 1.5 3 3 1 5 2 3 41 70.8

5

111.8

5

119

7.15

13.5

2 5 14.5

3 5 2 6.6

1.5 3 8 2 1 4.5

5 1 77.6

35.5

6

113.1

6

121

7.84

13 3.5

10 12 22.5

3 16.3

3 2 3 16 2 4 6 5 121.3

0 121.3

123

1.7

2 10 10.6

31 11.3

5 10 2.1 16.7

2.1 8 7 6 2.3 124.1

0 124.1

125

0.9

0.8

10 11 6 21.6

5 10 15.9

28 13.3

6 1 128.

6

0 128.

6

128

-0.6

10 5 13.1

7 4 9 2.4 28 40 3 5 5 131.5

0 131.5

130

-1.5

36 10.8

80 5 131.8

0 131.8

132

0.2

40 3 85 7 135

0 135

135

0

21 22 55 5 N/A

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

20 3.7

N/A

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

39.5

107.

045

.08.

335

.066

.623

.892

.66.

032

.620

.015

.88.

135

.0

13.6

12.5

44.7

25.4

64.0

260.

010

.033

.831

.09.

325

.793

8.7

387

.698

1326

.398

1358

31.6

02

Tabl

e 2

- S

chem

e D

etai

ls

Just

ific

atio

n of

prio

rity

(eg

sig

nifi

canc

e in

mee

ting

wid

erre

gion

al o

bjec

tive

s, s

trat

egie

s an

d pl

ans)

Com

men

ts (

eg r

isks

to

deliv

erab

ility

or

tim

ing,

links

to

hous

ing/

reg

ener

atio

n pr

ojec

tsV

fm/B

CR

(whe

re a

vaila

ble)

Wid

erre

gion

al o

bjec

tive

s

A34

Ald

erle

y Ed

ge a

nd N

ethe

rAld

erle

yB

ypas

s.

A55

6 (M

6 to

M56

) Im

prov

emen

t.

Acc

ess

to P

orto

fLiv

erpo

ol Im

prov

emen

t.

Ash

ton

Nor

ther

n B

ypas

s S

tage

2.

Bid

ston

Mos

s Vi

aduc

t(Ju

nctio

n 1

ofth

eM

53 m

otor

way

).

Bla

ckpo

ol a

nd F

leet

woo

d Tr

amw

ayU

pgra

de –

Pha

se 1

.

Bol

ton

Tow

n C

entre

Pub

lic T

rans

port

Stra

tegy

Com

plet

ion

ofH

eysh

am to

M6

Link

.

Expl

oito

ppor

tuni

ties

to im

prov

e ac

cess

to k

now

ledg

e ba

se.

Prov

ide

key

acce

ss to

the

regi

on,

Man

ches

terA

irpor

tand

Man

ches

terC

ityR

egio

n bu

tsuf

ferf

rom

hig

h le

vels

of

cong

estio

n.

Live

rpoo

l por

tpro

vide

s a

glob

al g

atew

ayfo

rthe

regi

onal

and

nat

iona

l eco

nom

yan

d is

wel

l pla

ced

to b

enef

itfro

m th

eex

pans

ion

ofw

orld

trad

e.

Impr

ove

and

man

age

dem

and

on G

tr.M

ancs

. Hig

hway

net

wor

k.

Link

s de

priv

ed a

reas

into

job

oppo

rtuni

ties

and

supp

orts

opp

ortu

nitie

sar

isin

g fro

m c

asin

o de

velo

pmen

t.Im

prov

ing

publ

ic tr

ansp

ortp

atro

nage

has

been

iden

tifie

d as

a p

riorit

y w

ithin

the

draf

tRES

.

Cre

ates

bet

teri

nteg

rate

d pu

blic

tran

spor

tse

rvic

es w

ithin

Man

ches

terC

ity R

egio

n

Sup

ports

the

grow

th o

fthe

por

tof

Hey

sham

by

prov

idin

g ef

ficie

nttra

ding

links

.

��

�

��

�

Loca

l

Q2

Q2

Loca

l

Q1

Q1

Loca

l

Q2

Y Y Y Y Y

BC

R o

f1.4

(Low

Val

ue fo

rM

oney

)

BC

R o

f9 H

igh

(VfM

)

BC

R o

f3(H

igh

VfM

)

B C

R o

f1.9

(Med

ium

VfM

)

Info

rmat

ion

nota

vaila

ble

BC

R o

f1.6

(Med

ium

VfM

)

BC

R o

f1.4

(Low

Val

ue fo

rM

oney

)

BC

R o

f7.4

(Hig

h Vf

M)

This

is C

hesh

ire’s

top

prio

rity

sche

me.

It

has

been

appr

oved

by

DfT

subj

ectt

o th

e R

FA p

roce

ss, h

asbe

en th

roug

h a

publ

ic in

quiry

and

has

pla

nnin

gpe

rmis

sion

. D

esig

n is

sub

stan

tially

com

plet

e an

dsc

hem

e co

uld

proc

eed

to c

onst

ruct

ion

soon

afte

rfu

ndin

g is

app

rove

d.

This

is th

e H

ighw

ays

Age

ncy’

s to

p pr

iorit

y re

gion

alsc

hem

e fo

rthe

NW

. N

otye

tata

n ad

vanc

ed s

tage

–un

deri

nves

tigat

ion

fore

ntry

to th

e TP

I. T

his

has

been

iden

tifie

d as

a s

igni

fican

tprio

rity

fort

he N

orth

ern

Way

and

a pr

iorit

y w

ithin

the

draf

tRES

. Ass

umed

2.5

year

cons

truct

ion

perio

d –

Late

201

3 to

ear

ly 2

014

Cur

rent

ly a

tan

early

sta

ge o

finv

estig

atio

n by

the

Hig

hway

s A

genc

y. T

his

has

been

iden

tifie

d as

asi

gnifi

cant

prio

rity

fort

he N

orth

ern

Way

and

a p

riorit

yw

ithin

the

draf

tRES

. H

as li

nks

to T

horn

ton

to S

witc

hIs

land

sch

eme.

Plan

ning

App

rova

l for

the

road

was

gra

nted

inS

epte

mbe

r200

3. T

he C

ounc

il ha

s be

en e

xpec

ting

tom

ake

CPO

and

Sid

e R

oads

Ord

ers

in D

ecem

ber

2005

. Im

plem

enta

tion

be b

roug

htfo

rwar

d on

ce th

eS

tatu

tory

Pro

cess

es h

ave

been

com

plet

ed if

fund

ing

was

ava

ilabl

e.

Full

mai

nten

ance

opt

ion

assu

med

whi

ch is

the

leas

tco

stop

tion,

wou

ld h

ave

the

leas

tenv

ironm

enta

lim

pact

and

wou

ld n

otbe

sub

ject

to s

tatu

tory

proc

edur

es o

rany

land

acq

uisi

tion

whi

ch m

ay b

e th

eca

se w

ith o

ther

optio

ns.

Maj

orsc

hem

e bu

sine

ss c

ase

subm

issi

on is

cur

rent

lybe

ing

cons

ider

ed b

y th

e D

fT.

A m

inim

um o

f£16

m is

requ

ired

betw

een

2006

/7an

d 20

08/9

to ta

ke in

toac

coun

tess

entia

l mai

nten

ance

nee

ds o

fthe

exi

stin

gtra

mw

ay.

The

impl

icat

ions

ofa

long

erph

ased

prog

ram

me

on ro

lling

sto

ckha

s no

tbee

n qu

antif

ied.

Maj

orsc

hem

e bu

sine

ss c

ase

subm

issi

on is

cur

rent

lybe

ing

cons

ider

ed b

y th

e D

fT.

Nor

ther

nW

ayR

TSP

rior

itis

atio

nR

ES

Sch

eme

nam

e

Just

ific

atio

n of

prio

rity

(eg

sig

nifi

canc

e in

mee

ting

wid

erre

gion

al o

bjec

tive

s, s

trat

egie

s an

d pl

ans)

Com

men

ts (

eg r

isks

to

deliv

erab

ility

or

tim

ing,

links

to

hous

ing/

reg

ener

atio

n pr

ojec

tsV

fm/B

CR

(whe

re a

vaila

ble)

Wid

erre

gion

al o

bjec

tive

s

Cre

we

Gre

en L

ink

Roa

d (S

outh

ern

Sec

tion)

.

Cre

we

Rai

l Gat

eway

.

East

Lanc

ashi

re R

apid

Tra

nsit.

Edge

Lan

e/Ea

ster

n A

ppro

ache

s.

Glo

ssop

Spu

r.

Gre

ater

Man

ches

terA

utho

ritie

s H

ighw

ayR

etai

ning

Wal

ls S

treng

then

ing

Sch

eme.

Gre

ater

Man

ches

terU

rban

Tra

ffic

Con

trol

(GM

UTC

).

Hal

l Lan

e S

trate

gic

Gat

eway

.

Supp

orts

dev

elop

men

tofe

ffect

ive

regi

onal

inte

grat

ed p

ublic

tran

spor

tnet

wor

k.

Link

s an

are

a of

need

to g

row

thop

portu

nitie

s in

two

City

Reg

ions

.

This

sch

eme,

toge

ther

with

Hal

l Lan

eim

prov

es a

cces

s to

the

Live

rpoo

l City

Cen

tre a

nd s

uppo

rtth

e gr

owth

oft

he C

ityR

egio

n. T

hey

also

sup

port

two

stra

tegi

cem

ploy

men

tsite

s an

d im

prov

e th

e ci

ty’s

imag

e.

Mai

nten

ance

will

ens

ure

bette

rm

anag

emen

tofe

xist

ing

high

way

net

wor

k.

Red

uce

need

to tr

avel

by

carb

yin

tegr

atin

g m

easu

res

to m

anag

e tra

vel

dem

and.

R

educ

ing

cong

estio

n ha

s be

enid

entif

ied

as a

prio

rity

with

in th

e dr

aftR

ES.

This

sch

eme,

toge

ther

with

Edg

e La

ne,

impr

ove

acce

ss to

the

Live

rpoo

l City

Cen

tre a

nd s

uppo

rtth

e gr

owth

oft

he C

ityR

egio

n. T

hey

also

sup

port

two

stra

tegi

cem

ploy

men

tsite

s an

d im

prov

e th

e ci

ty’s

imag

e.

Q4

Q3

Q1

Q1

Loca

l

Loca

l

Loca

l

Q1

Info

rmat

ion

nota

vaila

ble

BC

R o

fapp

rox

3 (H

igh

VfM

)

BC

R o

f3.1

(Hig

h Vf

M)

BC

R o

f2.1

(Hig

h Vf

M)

Hig

h Va

lue

for

Mon

ey

EstB

CR

of4

.6(H

igh

VfM

)

BC

R o

f7.4

(Hig

h Vf

M)

BC

R o

f2.1

(Hig

h Vf

M)

Prov

ides

acc

ess

to re

gion

al e

mpl

oym

ents

ite a

tB

asfo

rd. P

artf

unds

onl

y.

Res

tfro

m o

ther

sour

ces.

Tim

ing

is li

nked

to o

ther

impr

ovem

ents

. M

ay n

eed

are

duce

d le

vel o

ffun

ding

from

RFA

than

indi

cate

d.

Link

ed to

impr

ovem

ents

by

othe

rs.

This

is C

hesh

ire’s

seco

nd h

ighe

stpr

iorit

y.

Orig

inal

cos

tass

umed

to b

e in

200

5pr

ices

. S

uppo

rtsth

e br

oade

raim

s of

the

hous

ing

mar

ketr

enew

alin

itiat

ives

in E

astL

ancs

.

Has

pro

visi

onal

acc

epta

nce

from

DfT

. Li

nked

toC

apita

l ofC

ultu

re 2

008.

S

uppo

rts th

e br

oade

raim

s of

the

hous

ing

mar

ketr

enew

al in

itiat

ives

in M

erse

ysid

e.ER

DF

Obj

ectiv

e 1

look

ing

to p

rovi

de £

3.5m

cont

ribut

ion.

S

chem

e ne

eds

appr

oval

by

Dec

. 200

6to

sec

ure

O1

fund

ing.

Ther

e is

a p

oten

tial f

ora

£5m

cos

tsav

ing

ifth

issc

hem

e is

con

stru

cted

con

curre

ntly

with

the

A57

/A62

8 M

ottra

m-T

intw

istle

Byp

ass.

The

pro

posa

l is

fort

his

sche

me

to b

e co

nsid

ered

att

he s

ame

publ

icin

quiry

sch

edul

ed fo

rnex

tyea

r. S

trong

env

ironm

enta

lop

posi

tion

has

alre

ady

been

exp

ress

ed.

The

inte

ntio

nno

w is

to m

ake

the

Com

puls

ory

Purc

hase

Ord

ers

and

Sid

e R

oads

Ord

ers

atth

e en

d of

Janu

ary

2006

in li

new

ith th

e H

ighw

ays

Age

ncy

adve

rtisi

ng th

e or

ders

for

the

Mot

tram

to T

intw

istle

Byp

ass.

Sup

ports

the

broa

dera

ims

ofth

e ho

usin

g m

arke

tre

new

al in

itiat

ives

in O

ldha

m.

Nee

d to

take

into

acco

untu

rgen

tmai

nten

ance

nee

ds o

fOld

ham

so

fund

ing

shou

ld b

e al

loca

ted

early

in th

e in

vest

men

tpr

ogra

mm

e.

An

upgr

ade

sche

me

that

shou

ld b

e pr

ogra

mm

ed e

arly

to m

ake

best

valu

e of

exis

ting

spec

ialis

ts w

ho h

ave

been

em

ploy

ed o

n th

e ph

ase

1up

grad

e du

e to

fini

shin

200

6.

Sup

ports

the

broa

dera

ims

ofth

e ho

usin

gm

arke

tren

ewal

initi

ativ

es in

Eas

tMan

ches

ter.

Cur

rent

ly u

nder

goin

g a

publ

ic in

quiry

that

has

been

puto

n ho

ld d

ue to

the

deci

sion

abo

utM

erse

ytra

mLi

ne 1

. Ide

ally

this

sch

eme

need

s to

be

com

plet

ed in

time

fort

he C

apita

l ofC

ultu

re in

200

8.Li

nked

toC

apita

l ofC

ultu

re 2

008.

S

uppo

rts th

e br

oade

raim

s of

the

hous

ing

mar

ketr

enew

al in

itiat

ives

in M

erse

ysid

e.

Nor

ther

nW

ayR

TSP

rior

itis

atio

nR

ES

Sch

eme

nam

e

Y Y Y Y Y

Just

ific

atio

n of

prio

rity

(eg

sig

nifi

canc

e in

mee

ting

wid

erre

gion

al o

bjec

tive

s, s

trat

egie

s an

d pl

ans)

Com

men

ts (

eg r

isks

to

deliv

erab

ility

or

tim

ing,

links

to

hous

ing/

reg

ener

atio

n pr

ojec

tsV

fm/B

CR

(whe

re a

vaila

ble)

Wid

erre

gion

al o

bjec

tive

s

Leig

h-S

alfo

rd-M

anch

este

rQB

C.

M60

JET

TS Q

BC

.

Mer

sey

Gat

eway

.

Met

rolin

kEx

tens

ions

.

Roc

hdal

e In

terc

hang

e.

SEM

MM

S R

elie

fRoa

d S

chem

e.

Silv

erJu

bile

e B

ridge

Maj

orM

aint

enan

ceS

chem

e.

Thor

nton

to S

witc

h Is

land

Lin

k.

Yello

w S

choo

l Bus

es.

��

��

Loca

l

Q1

Q1

Loca

l

Q3

Q1

Loca

l

Loca

l

BC

R o

f1.9

(Med

ium

VfM

)

BC

R o

f2.4

(Hig

h Vf

M)

BC

R o

f2(H

igh

VfM

)

BC

R o

f2.3

(Hig

h Vf

M)

BC

R o

f2.4

(Hig

h Vf

M)

BC

R o

f5.7

(Hig

h Vf

M)

BC

R o

f19.

0(H

igh

VfM

)

BC

R g

reat

erth

an 1

5(H

igh

VfM

)

BC

R o

f2.1

(Hig

h Vf

M)

GM

PTE

is in

vest

igat

ing

the

pote

ntia

l for

this

sch

eme

topr

ogre

ss v

ia a

PFI

rout

e.

Ifth

is is

suc

cess

ful,

then

ther

ew

ould

be

a re

duce

d ca

ll on

RFA

mon

ies.

TW

A p

ower

sex

pire

in 2

010.

N

eed

to s

tart

on s

ite b

y la

te 2

009.

This

con

sist

s of

a nu

mbe

rofd

iffer

entc

orrid

ors

and

assu

ch c

ould

be

split

into

sep

arat

e co

ntra

cts

over

diffe

rent

times

cale

s to

fiti

n w

ith a

vaila

ble

fund

ing.

PFI S

chem

e. T

otal

cos

tapp

rox.

£37

0m E

nviro

nmen

tally

sens

itive

issu

es w

ould

nee

d to

be

addr

esse

d at

apu

blic

inqu

iry

Ass

umed

sta

rt20

08/0

9.

Onl

y £2

60m

oft

he re

quire

d£7

53m

fund

ing

is b

eing

sou

ghtf

rom

the

RFA

. Th

e re

stis

sub

ject

to d

iscu

ssio

ns a

nd a

gree

men

tove

rTIF

. Lat

erR

FA u

sed

to re

-pay

bor

row

ings

orT

IFm

onie

s.

Sup

ports

the

broa

dera

ims

ofth

e ho

usin

g m

arke

tren

ewal

initi

ativ

es in

Eas

tMan

ches

ter.

Old

ham

and

Roc

hdal

e.

A re

lativ

ely

smal

l sch

eme

linke

d to

oth

erur

ban

rege

nera

tion

with

in th

e to

wn

cent

re. D

evel

oper

cont

ribut

ion

atris

kif

sign

ifica

ntly

del

ayed

. S

uppo

rts th

ebr

oade

raim

s of

the

hous

ing

mar

ketr

enew

al in

itiat

ives

in R

ochd

ale.

A p

ropo

sed

PFI s

chem

e su

bjec

tto

esta

blis

hing

a P

FIpa

rtner

once

ther

e is

app

rova

l to

proc

eed

from

the

DfT

.To

tal c

osta

ppro

x £4

32m

.

The

leve

l ofm

aint

enan

ce (

and

ther

efor

e fu

ndin

gre

quire

d) c

ould

redu

ce if

the

Mer

sey

Gat

eway

sch

eme

was

impl

emen

ted

early

and

thes

e sc

hem

es w

ere

cons

ider

ed a

s a

join

tpac

kage

. to

Mer

sey

Gat

eway

Due

to th

e le

vel o

fdet

aile

d w

ork

unde

rtake

n fo

rthi

ssc

hem

e, it

is e

xpec

ted

that

itco

uld

be d

eliv

ered

in li

new

ith th

e tim

esca

le id

entif

ied

in th

e re

vise

d in

vest

men

tpr

ogra

mm

e. T

his

sche

me

has

links

with

the

Hig

hway

sA

genc

y’A

cces

s to

Por

tofL

iver

pool

sch

eme.

Cou

ld b

ring

forw

ard

ifsp

are

fund

ing

avai

labl

e in

any

year

Nor

ther

nW

ayR

TSP

rior

itis

atio

nR

ES

Sch

eme

nam

e

Y Y Y Y Y Y

Red

uces

nee

d to

trav

el b

y ca

rby

prov

idin

g be

tteri

nteg

rate

d pu

blic

trans

port.

Rel

ieve

s co

nges

tion,

sup

ports

two

stra

tegi

c re

gion

al s

ites,

impr

oves

relia

bilit

yof

acce

ss to

Liv

erpo

ol a

irpor

tand

impr

oves

link

ages

with

the

Live

rpoo

l City

regi

on

Enco

urag

es p

ublic

tran

spor

tuse

, wid

ens

labo

urm

arke

ts, l

inks

dep

rived

are

as in

tojo

b op

portu

nitie

s an

d en

sure

s su

stai

nabl

egr

owth

oft

he M

anch

este

rCity

Reg

ion.

Enco

urag

es p

ublic

tran

spor

tuse

, wid

ens

labo

urm

arke

ts, l

inks

dep

rived

are

as in

tojo

b op

portu

nitie

s an

d en

sure

s su

stai

nabl

egr

owth

oft

he M

anch

este

rCity

Reg

ion.

Prov

ide

key

acce

ss to

the

regi

on,

Man

ches

terA

irpor

tand

Man

ches

terC

ityR

egio

n bu

tsuf

ferf

rom

hig

h le

vels

of

cong

estio

n

29

Table 3 - Committed Schemes

1

1.68

2

20.5

0.89

5

3.2

2.702

1.05

0.812

5.114

3.5

3.46

Committed Schemes (£m) 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

HIGHWAYS AGENCY

A590 High and Low Newton Bypass

A66 Temple Sowerby

A595 Parton - Lillyhall Improvement

A57/A628 Mottram - Hollingworth -Tintwistle

Total

5.75

20

3.6

2.91

17.135

5

3.346

0.25

1.02

33.5

3.59

24.215

3

2.5

1

18.05

0.14

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

4.98

7.20

0.70

4.05

67.842 0

11.06

18.40

7.19

1

96.442

6.29

13.48

12.80

19.11

117.004

6.59

42.71

70.8535.42

35.56

22.337

39.08

27.28

103.09

387.7

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 avariety 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. GONWsupported the process through its role as facilitator, and the drafting process was led by theNWRA.

The advice has arisen as a product of consensus, using existing governance and inter-agencyworking arrangements wherever possible. It has utilised extensive evidence and research toprovide integrated, credible advice, consistent with wider national strategy and policies - Therehave 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 economicdevelopment, a detailed sustainability appraisal of the advice was undertaken, using theregionally approved Integrated Appraisal Toolkit.

RES Advisory GroupMembers

Regional TransportForum Members

Regional HousingBoard Members

Association of CollegesChambers of CommerceCheshire & Warrington Economic AllianceCBICulture NorthwestCumbria VisionEnglish NatureEnglish PartnershipsEnvironment AgencyGreater Manchester ForumInstitute of DirectorsJobcentre PlusLancashire Economic PartnershipThe Mersey PartnershipNorthwest Business Leadership TeamNWDANWRANorthwest Universities AssociationONE North WestPrivate Sector Partners LtdRegional LSCRegional Skills PartnershipStrategic Health AuthoritiesTUCVoluntary Sector North West

DfTDfT RailHighways AgencyGMPTAGMPTEGONWGreater Manchester JointTransport teamLocal AuthoritiesMerseyside LTP PartnershipMerseytravelNorthern WayNWDANWRA

English PartnershipsGONWHouse BuilderHousing CorporationMortgage LenderNWDANW Housing ForumNWRA

30

Designed and Produced by the Northwest Regional Development Agency Marketing Department

20th January 2006

NWDA G1-31

Northwest Regional Development Agency

PO Box 37Renaissance HouseCentre ParkWarrington WA1 1XBTel: +44 (0)1925 400 100Fax: +44 (0)1925 400 400e-mail: information@nwda.co.uk

www.nwda.co.ukwww.englandsnorthwest.com

North West Regional Assembly

Wigan Investment CentreWaterside DriveWiganWN3 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)