DISTILLATE Appraisal Workshop 21 May 07 Michael Padgett, Regional Transport Advisor, Yorkshire & Humber Assembly

Experimental Transport Board – Summer pilot Boards – Y&H and S E Assembly Reported to DfT in October 2004 Valuable experience Proved value of collaborative working YHA/YF/GOYH Demonstrated good strategy alignment in Y&H A “real” RTB would need more emphasis on ranking proposals in priority order

“Interim” Regional Transport Board – Autumn 2005 Dec 2004 – consultation on Regional Funding Allocations June 2004 – GOYH invited tenders for prioritisation work Jan 2006 – forwarded advice to Government Comments Need to base advice on clear, consistent principles Need a transparent methodology Not a “fair shares for all” approach Need to accept collective responsibility

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board - Approach Aim to inform decision-making - not provide absolute ranking Individual proposals assessed on two key factors: Policy/objectives Value for money But assessment scores are not combined Then provide comments on Deliverability/affordability/risk

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board - Principles Priorities based on a restricted number of policy criteria; No weighting of principal criteria (economic/environmental/social policies) Value for money based only on Benefit/Cost Ratio; Deliverability used only as a narrative to inform decisions; Scheme evidence provided by scheme sponsors

What is the Regional Spatial Strategy?  A spatial framework for the Region over 15 to 20 years - both land use and transport  Priorities: ‘where things go’, ‘how much’ and ‘how big’ (for housing, businesses, etc.)  A framework for Local Development Documents and Local Transport Plans  Informs and supports other strategies and programmes that have a bearing on land use activities  Regional Transport Strategy an integral and clearly identifiable part of a RSS

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board – Policy Objectives Wide range of policy documents reviewed in developing criteria, but focus is on how well proposals will deliver the RSS 15 policy criteria, divided into 3 groups: Economic Environmental Social Use a 7-point scoring system for each criterion, assisted by GIS maps of spatial policies

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board – Value for Money Based on DfT guidance: BCR less than 1: poor VfM BCR between 1 and 1.5: low VfM BCR between 1.5 and 2: medium VfM BCR over 2: high VfM Problems with: Cost bases – should all be outturn Major Scheme Bids in 2005 also included environmental elements Optimism Bias

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board – Deliverability Scheme status – range from “committed” to “proposed for investigation” Comments on any bids already made to DfT State of readiness - details of 3 areas of risk: Risk to programme – eg public inquiries Risk to cost Risk to public/ stakeholder acceptance

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board – Affordability Affordability measure – 3 elements: Total cost of scheme Total cost to Government (or indicator of potential for 3 rd party funding) Will scheme be financially sustainable – eg operating costs?

Methodology used by the Interim Transport Board – Presentation

Government response on RFAs - July 2006 Generally accepted the recommendations List schemes for funding in next 3 years Expect to fund 11 schemes under development But DfT to retain control of the budgets Very impressed by the effort in the Region - and progress developing consensus In future – build on this success Expect to seek formal advice within next 2 years

Regional Transport Board – key tasks Review Regional Funding Allocation schemes where cost increases> 10% Advise Government on “new” schemes – both policy fit and funding availability Carry out full review of RFA schemes – to send advice to Government July 2008