Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case 23 May 2017 Gedling Borough Council, Rushcliffe Borough Council & Nottinghamshire County Council Mott MacDonald 9 Portland Street Manchester M1 3BE United Kingdom T +44 (0)161 914 8880 mottmac.com Gedling Borough Council, Rushcliffe Borough Council & Nottinghamshire County Poacher Line Strategic Outline Council 382505 1 A Business Case Mott MacDonald 23 May 2017 Mott MacDonald Limited. Registered in England and Wales no. 1243967. Registered office: Mott MacDonald House, 8-10 Sydenham Road, Croydon CR0 2EE, Gedling Borough Council, Rushcliffe Borough Council & Nottinghamshire County United Kingdom Council Mott MacDonald | Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case Issue and revision record Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description - 10 May KJC, MF, CH CH Draft Document 2017 JB, JC A 23 May KJC, MF, CH CH Final Document 2017 JB, JC Document reference: 382505 | 1 | A Information class: Standard This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above- captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties. This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it. This report has been pr epared sol el y for use by the party which commissi oned it (the ‘Client’) i n connecti on with the capti oned proj ect. It should not be used for any other purpose. N o person other than the Client or any party who has expressl y agreed ter ms of r eliance with us (the ‘Reci pient(s)’) may rel y on the content, i nformati on or any views expressed i n the repor t. We accept no duty of care, responsi bility or liability to any other r eci pient of thi s document. T his r eport is confi denti al and contains pr opri etar y intell ectual property. No representati on, warranty or under taking, expr ess or i mplied, is made and no responsi bility or liability is accepted by us to any party other than the Cli ent or any Reci pient(s), as to the accuracy or completeness of the i nformati on contai ned i n this r eport. For the avoidance of doubt this r eport does not in any way purport to i nclude any legal , insur ance or fi nanci al advice or opi nion. We disclai m all and any liability whether arising i n tort or contract or other wise which it might otherwise have to any party other than the Cli ent or the Reci pient(s), in r espect of this report, or any infor mation attri buted to i t. We accept no r esponsibility for any error or omission i n the r eport which is due to an error or omission i n data, infor mation or statements supplied to us by other par ties incl udi ng the client (‘D ata’). We have not i nd ependentl y verified such D ata and have assumed it to be accurate, complete, reli abl e and current as of the date of such infor mation. Forecasts presented i n this document were pr epared usi ng Data and the report is dependent or based on D ata. Inevitabl y, some of the assumptions used to develop the for ecasts will not be realised and unantici pated events and circumstances may occur. C onsequentl y M ott MacDonal d does not guarantee or warr ant the concl usi ons contained i n the repor t as there are li kel y to be differ ences between the for ecasts and the actual results and those di ffer ences may be material. Whil e we consi der that the infor mation and opini ons gi ven i n this r eport are sound all parti es must rel y on their own skill and j udgement when making use of it. Under no circumstances may this report or any extr act or summar y ther eof be used in connection with any public or pri vate sec urities offering i ncluding any rel ated memorandum or prospectus for any securities offering or stock exchange listing or announcement. 382505 | 1 | A | 23 May 2017 Mott MacDonald | Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case Contents Executive Summary 1 1 Introduction 5 2 Strategic Case – Vision and Aspirations 6 2.1 Introduction 6 2.2 Strategic Economic, Transport and Development Goals for the Region 8 2.2.1 The Region 8 2.2.2 The Counties served by the Poacher Line 8 2.2.3 The Districts served by the Poacher Line 10 2.3 Individual Community Aspirations for their Development 13 2.3.2 Objectives for the Poacher Line SOBC 16 3 Strategic Case – Issues and Opportunities 17 3.1 Introduction – Understanding the Line and its Communities 17 3.2 Current Rail Usage 18 3.3 Strategic Rail Issues and Opportunities on the Poacher Line 20 3.3.1 Issues 20 3.3.2 Strategic Rail Opportunities 26 3.4 Strategic Highways Issues – the A52 28 3.5 Connectivity Issues and Opportunities for the Communities along the Poacher Line 30 3.5.1 Understanding the Line by Community 30 3.5.2 Netherfield 31 3.5.3 Radcliffe on Trent 33 3.5.4 Bingham 35 3.5.5 Aslockton, and Elton & Orston 37 3.5.6 Bottesford 39 3.5.7 Heading into Grantham 41 3.6 Socio-Economic Issues 42 3.6.1 Introduction 42 3.6.2 Population and demographics 42 3.6.3 Employment and travel to work 44 3.6.4 Deprivation 46 3.6.5 Future Economic Growth 47 3.6.6 TEAM and economic impact analysis 49 3.7 Summary: The Problems and Needs of the Communities on the Poacher Line 51 4 Strategic Case – Options Assessment and Preferred Option 53 4.1 Introduction 53 382505 | 1 | A | 23 May 2017 Mott MacDonald | Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case 4.2 Improving the Poacher Line to Serve its Communities and Enable the Wider Economic Growth of the Area 53 4.3 Options Assessment Methodology 54 4.3.1 ‘Do Something’ Options for the Poacher Line between Nottingham and Grantham 54 4.3.2 Sensitivity Tests 55 4.3.3 Extending the Poacher Line Service to Benefit Travellers Later in the Day 56 4.4 Options Assessment Results 56 4.4.1 Summary of Monetised Costs and Benefits 56 4.5 Financial Case Considerations 57 4.5.1 Financial Performance of the Options, for the Rail Industry 57 4.6 Preferred Options 58 4.7 Realising the Benefits 58 5 Economic Case 61 5.1 Introduction 61 5.2 Long-list of Options 61 5.2.1 Guiding Principles 61 5.2.2 Options Considered 61 5.3 Rail Modelling Methodology 63 5.3.1 Timetable Changes 64 5.3.2 Local Planning Data 64 5.3.3 Consistency with TEMPRO Data 65 5.4 Demand Forecasts 66 5.5 Appraisal 67 5.5.1 10 Year Appraisal Period 67 5.5.2 Assumptions 67 5.6 Summary of Monetised Costs and Benefits 69 5.6.1 Value for Money 69 5.6.2 Commentary 69 5.7 Sensitivity Tests 70 5.7.1 ST1 – Radcliffe on Trent Demand 70 5.7.2 ST2 - Removal of Peak Period Calls at Aslockton 70 6 Financial Case 72 6.1 Introduction 72 6.2 Assessment of Financial Performance 72 7 Commercial and Management Cases 74 7.1 Introduction 74 7.2 Specification & Procurement 74 7.3 Management of the Preferred Scheme 75 382505 | 1 | A | 23 May 2017 Mott MacDonald | Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case Appendices 76 A. Economic Appraisal Tables 77 A.1 Do Something 1 – Transport Economic Efficiency 77 A.2 Do Something 1 – Public Accounts 77 A.3 Do Something 1 – Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits 78 A.4 Do Something 2 – Transport Economic Efficiency 79 A.5 Do Something 2 – Public Accounts 79 A.6 Do Something 2 – Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits 80 A.7 Do Something 3 – Transport Economic Efficiency 81 A.8 Do Something 3 – Public Accounts 81 A.9 Do Something 3 – Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits 82 A.10 Do Something 4 – Transport Economic Efficiency 83 A.11 Do Something 4 – Public Accounts 83 A.12 Do Something 4 – Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits 84 382505 | 1 | A | 23 May 2017 Mott MacDonald | Poacher Line Strategic Outline Business Case 1 Executive Summary This Strategic Outline Business Case (SOBC) presents a case for service and infrastructure improvements to the Poacher Line, a rail branch line that runs eastwards from Nottingham to Grantham, through the counties of Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, and Lincolnshire. Local Authority partners note that this section of the Poacher Line suffers from inadequate frequency of service and elongated journey times due to infrastructure issues, leading to economic and social disadvantage for the communities along the line. With planned growth in housing and employment, the need for a more frequent service is becoming ever more pressing. The infrequent level of service limits the ability of the Poacher Line communities to sustainably access jobs and opportunities in Nottingham and beyond. The poor level of service appears particularly unfavourable when compared to the better-connected Nottingham commuter belt to the west of the city.