a303 a358 a30: corridor improvement programme

Click here to load reader

Post on 01-Jun-2022

0 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

Somerset County Council
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme
Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
285333CP-HLT/P3-1/3
County Hall Taunton
Somerset TA1 4DY
(A technical addendum to Phase 2 – Economic Impact Study)
Report Title : A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Report Status : Final
Job No : 285333CP-HLT
Date : January 2013
Checked by (technical) Marcus Chick
Approved by - Checked by (quality assurance) David Carter
Revision details
1 14
December 2012
2 21
December 2012
- Final Draft - revisions based on SCC comments dated 19 December 2012
3 January 2013 - Final incorporating next steps
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
CONTENTS Page
1 Introduction 1 1.1 General 1 1.2 Phase 3 Objectives 1 1.3 Improvement Sections 1 1.4 Background to the A303 / A358 / A30 Route Corridor 2 1.5 Report Structure 2
2 Transport Economic Efficiency 3 2.1 General 3 2.2 Methodology 3 2.3 Summary Results 5
3 Wider Economic Impact Assesment 6 3.1 General 6 3.2 Qualitative Assessment 6
4 Conclusions and Recommendations 7 4.1 General 7 4.2 TEE 7 4.3 WEI 7
Figures Figure 1 – Plan showing Improvement Schemes 8
Appendix Appendix 1 – TEE Outputs by Section i
List of Tables Table 1 – TEE Summary Table 5
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 1 -
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
1.1.1 In January 2012, following the Chancellor’s 2011 Autumn Statement in which he announced support and further funding availability for infrastructure projects, Somerset County Council (SCC) identified a need for a study into potential A303 / A30 infrastructure upgrades and consequently commissioned Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) to undertake the Phase 1 study.
1.1.2 The Phase 1 study findings were presented to Ministers in July 2012. A subsequent phase of work (Economic Impact Study (EIS) - Phase 2) was identified by SCC senior leaders as being required. The purpose of the Phase 2 work was to demonstrate the programme wide economic benefits of dualling the A303 / A30 from Amesbury to Honiton and the A358 from Ilminster to Taunton.
1.1.3 Following on from the Phase 2 package of work, SCC requested a further phase of work (Phase 3) in November 2012 to assess the economic merits of individual improvements to the A303 / A358 / A30.
1.1.4 This report presents the findings of the Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis which is an addendum to the Phase 2 – EIS ‘A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme - Economic Impact Study’, January 2013 (285333CP-HLT/4/6).
1.2 Phase 3 Objectives
1.2.1 The objectives of the Phase 3 – Sectional Economic Analysis are:
1. To demonstrate the Transport Economic Efficiency (TEE) impacts by section;
2. To demonstrate the Wider Economic Impacts (WEI) by section (if feasible); and
3. To identify a suitable phasing strategy based on benefit accrual.
1.3 Improvement Sections
1.3.1 The improvements sections for which the Sectional Economic Analysis relates are listed below and shown on Figure 1.
1. A303 Amesbury to Berwick Down (Stonehenge)
2. A303 Wylye to Stockton Wood
3. A303 Chicklade Bottom to Mere
4. A303 Sparkford to Ilchester
5. A303 Podimore Roundabout
7. A303 Cartgate Roundabout
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 2 -
1.4 Background to the A303 / A358 / A30 Route Corridor
1.4.1 The A303 / A30 passes through Devon, Somerset, Wiltshire and a 2.5-mile section in Dorset. It is a trunk road of regional importance and a popular route for long distance traffic as an alternative to the M4/M5 motorway.
1.4.2 The London to South West and South Wales Multi-Modal Study (SWARMMS), completed in 2002, provided a long term strategy to address passenger and freight transport on the main rail and road corridors between London, the South West and South Wales. One of the recommendations of SWARMMS was to improve the A303 / A30 corridor between the M3 and the M5 at Exeter, to provide a high standard dual carriageway alternative to the M4/M5.
1.4.3 Following SWARMMS, further work was undertaken by the Highways Agency on improvements to the single carriageway sections of the A303 / A30. This included work to compare the A303 / A30 between Ilminster and Honiton, which runs through the Blackdown Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), with an alternative improvement to the A358 between Ilminster and the M5 at Taunton.
1.4.4 The work on the A358 led to a decision by the Transport Secretary at the end of 2004 to upgrade the A358 alternative, thereby avoiding the environmentally sensitive AONB. A series of Do Minimum improvements to the A303 / A30 between Ilminster and Honiton also formed a part of the alternative solution.
1.4.5 However, by 2007, with the cancellation of the A303 Amesbury to Berwick Down Scheme (which included Stonehenge) and the South West Region's conclusion that the A303 / A358 scheme could not be funded from the Regional Funding Allocation, the Highways Agency could no longer pursue the SWARMMS strategy and instead a package of ‘Managed Solutions’ was investigated to improve the reliability and resilience of the A303/A30 corridor between Honiton and Amesbury.
1.4.6 The Area 2 Managing Agent Contractor (Balfour Beatty Mott MacDonald – BBMM) produced the A303 / A30 Corridor Management Study Options Report in November 2010. Their report suggested a number of packages, some corridor wide improvements and other local options.
1.5 Report Structure
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
Chapter 2 – Transport Economic Efficiency – reporting of TEE results by section
Chapter 3 – Wider Economic Impacts – a summary statement of feasibility
Chapter 4 – Conclusions and Recommendations
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 3 -
2.1 General
2.1.1 The purpose of this chapter is to document the methodology and results of the appraisal of the nine individual sections that make up the whole scheme.
2.1.2 This work has been based on the COBA modelling undertaken for Phase 2, disaggregating the results from that modelling to represent each section. No further COBA modelling has been undertaken to assess each of the sections individually.
2.1.3 At this initial stage, the transport benefits have assumed that the whole route is improved and results reported reflect the benefits of each section when providing the route as a whole. The assessment does not consider the impact on traffic patterns as a result of providing a single (or a combination of) section(s) as this will be different to the traffic patterns resulting from improving the whole route.
2.1.4 Further details of the approach to the development of the traffic patterns and the COBA model can be found in the ‘A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme – Economic Impact Study’, January 2013 (285333CP-HLT/4/6).
2.2 Methodology
2.2.1 The following section describes how the COBA outputs from the whole scheme have been adapted to provide estimates of the benefits (and costs) associated with the sections of the scheme. The TEE, Public Accounts and Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits tables for each of the Sections and the Whole Scheme, which document the make-up of the Present Value of Costs (PVC) and Present Value of Benefits (PVB), are included as Appendix 1 of the report.
2.2.2 A key point to note is that the sum of the benefits (and costs) of each section realises the total cost and benefit of the whole scheme. In reality should any of the sections be constructed individually, the costs and benefits would be likely to change. There will be different changes in travel patterns over the wider area depending on the section and the costs will fluctuate due to assumptions on economies of scale and internalisation of costs if the whole scheme were to be built as one.
Transport Economic Efficiency
2.2.3 The Transport Economic Efficiency (TEE) table documents the travel time and vehicle operating costs by consumers and businesses broken down into vehicle types during operation, construction and maintenance.
2.2.4 To determine the benefits of each Section, the travel time benefits and vehicle operating costs for each section were identified. This was possible as each Section is explicitly modelled in the COBA model developed for the whole scheme. These benefits were then used to apportion the results from the TEE table for the whole scheme, see overleaf. The same methodology was applied to determine vehicle operating costs.
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 4 -
=
= ( ) , = , , /
2.2.5 For example, the undiscounted journey time savings for Section 1 and the Whole Scheme are £313m and £1,588m respectively and the discounted journey time savings for Consumers in Cars / LGVs for the Whole Scheme is £883m. Therefore, the discounted journey time savings for Consumers in Cars / LGVs is [313/1,588]*883 or £174m.1
2.2.6 It is not possible to use results for each Section directly from COBA as the results for each Section are not reported to the same price base as the scheme costs. But given that the benefits are assumed to be accrued over the same period of time for each section, the discounting rate for the benefits would be the same for all Sections.
Public Accounts
2.2.7 The Public Accounts table documents the costs to Central Government of the scheme, specifically the investment costs, operating costs and changes to indirect tax revenue.
=
= ,
2.2.9 The construction cost estimates and the cost estimates for the individual elements of the Public Accounts table for the Whole Scheme have been taken from Appendix D and Table 16 respectively of the A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme – Economic Impact Study (December 2012) report.
2.2.10 As an example, the discounted Construction Cost of Section 1 and the Whole Scheme is £400m and £809m respectively. The total discounted investment cost as reported in the Public Accounts table under Investment Costs is £815m. Therefore, the equivalent cost of Section 1 for the Public Accounts table is [400/809]*815 or £403m. For Section 2 the Construction Cost is £13m and therefore the figure in the Public Accounts table for Section 2 has been assumed to be £13m.
Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits
2.2.11 This table is a summary of the key results from the TEE and Public Accounts tables. Information from these tables has been transferred across without the need for further modification.
2.2.12 The results for accident savings have been taken directly from the COBA model. The model has a representation of each Section and figures for each Section can be extracted for the Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits table.
1 The figures here have been rounded to the nearest £ million for clarity.
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 5 -
=
2.2.14 For example, the TEE Benefits for Section 1 and the Whole Scheme are £335m and £1,757m respectively. The cost in Greenhouse Gas emissions of the Whole Scheme is £30m. Therefore, the cost in Greenhouse Gas emissions is [335/1,757]*30 or £6m.
2.3 Summary Results
2.3.1 The following table summarises the results, in terms of PVCs and PVBs for each Section and the Whole Scheme. The values are taken directly from the Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits table.
Table 1 – TEE Summary Table Note: a. The Do Minimum scheme is the existing layout and has not been adjusted to represent the
pinch point junction improvement scheme at Cartgate roundabout which was not confirmed whilst the Phase 2 work was being completed.
b. PVB, PVC and NPV values are at 2002 prices.
2.3.2 In terms of which schemes represent the best value for money, represented as benefit:cost ratio (BCR), it can clearly be seen that the junction improvement schemes at Podimore Roundabout and Cartgate Roundabout return the greatest BCRs at 8.06 and 7.30 respectively. The table also shows that there are large benefits associated with the Sparkford to Ilchester and South Petherton to Southfields schemes.
Section 2011 Q2 (169) Scheme Costs
(£'000) PVB (£'000) PVC (£'000) NPV (£'000) BCR
#1 536,090 389,082 404,817 -15,735 0.96 #2 31,690 1,957 13,115 -11,158 0.15 #3 146,190 234,395 69,440 164,955 3.38 #4 46,860 167,188 28,496 138,692 5.87 #5 23,760 120,497 14,946 105,551 8.06 #6 66,610 190,314 36,039 154,275 5.28 #7 28,340 130,326 17,848 112,478 7.30 #8 275,240 589,454 148,910 440,544 3.96 #9 157,700 66,044 84,476 -18,432 0.78
1,312,480 1,889,256 818,087 1,071,169 2.31
A303 Podimore Rbt
Description
A303 Amesbury to Berwick Down A303 Wylye to Stockton Wood A303 Chicklade Bottom to Mere A303 Sparkford to Ilchester
A303 South Petherton to Southfields A303 Cartgate Rbt A358 Southfields to M5 Jn 25 A303 Southfields to Honiton
Whole Scheme
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 6 -
3.1 General
3.1.1 Considerable thought has been given by the project team to determine an appropriate and robust methodology for assessing the WEIs of sectional improvements utilising the economic model used in the EIS (Phase 2) which assessed the WEIs of a programme wide improvement.
3.1.2 A number of potential quantitative methodologies were worked through but the outputs were considered to be spurious. For this reason a qualitative assessment was considered to be more appropriate.
3.2 Qualitative Assessment
3.2.1 The Phase 2 WEI model quantified the wider economic impacts of dualling the A303 from Amesbury to Honiton and the A358 from Southfields to Junction 25 of the M5. The methodology used was based on survey results whereby respondents were asked their views of the potential benefits of an end to end dual carriageway. Due to the nature of the questions asked, it has proved almost impossible to generate tangible disaggregated outputs by section. Although quantitative methodologies have been applied, the outputs lacked tangibility.
3.2.2 Despite not being able to demonstrate tangible quantitative sectional outputs, the wider economic benefits of a programme wide improvement are likely to be significantly greater than the sum of the benefits from sectional improvements. These benefits would primarily accrue due to the increased reliability and resilience of the route. This would help to generate economic growth through efficiencies in getting goods to market and people to destinations. The consequential growth of local businesses and the expansion of the tourism sector would generate further economic growth through the down trickle of wealth.
3.2.3 The stakeholder consultation and the surveys undertaken to inform the WEI assessment for the Phase 2 work helped to confirm the common perception amongst local businesses and the wider community that improving the whole A303 would be beneficial to business therefore helping to spark economic growth.
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 7 -
4.1 General
4.1.1 This report is a technical addendum to the Economic Impact Study (Phase 2) and documents the disaggregated findings of the Phase 2 TEE impact assessment and WEI assessment.
4.2 TEE
4.2.1 The best value schemes in terms of benefit:cost ratio are Podimore Roundabout and Cartgate Roundabout with BCRs of 8.06 and 7.30 respectively. There are also large benefits associated with the Sparkford to Ilchester and South Petherton to Southfields schemes but lesser benefits associated with the Amesbury to Berwick Down scheme, the Wylye to Stockton Wood scheme and the Southfields to Honiton scheme.
4.2.2 It should be noted that at this initial stage, the transport benefits have assumed that the whole route is provided and results reported reflect the benefits of each section when providing the route as a whole. The assessment does not consider the impact on traffic patterns as a result of providing a single (or a combination of) section(s) as this will be different to the traffic patterns resulting from providing the whole route.
4.3 WEI
4.3.1 Despite not being able to demonstrate tangible quantitative sectional outputs, the qualitative findings of the Phase 2 study demonstrate that the wider economic benefits of a programme wide improvement would be significantly greater than the sum of the benefits from sectional improvements.
4.4 Next Steps
4.4.1 Following a Steering Group meeting on the 3rd January 2013, it was decided that the next step should be to consolidate the findings of the work undertaken to date into a key messages document. The key messages document will succinctly present the findings of the study to date for the purposes of lobbying government. The document must therefore clearly set out the following:
the proposal;
the economic benefits of the proposal;
how the proposal can be delivered; and
a programme for delivery.
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- 8 -
FIGURES
4. A303 Sparkford to
Southfields
Junction 25
Project Title
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Scheme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Riverside Chambers, Castle Street, Taunton, Somerset, TA1 4AP, Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd FigureTitle
9. A303 Southfields to
Wood
Riverside Chambers, Castle Street, Taunton, Somerset, TA1 4AP, Tel: (01823) 281190 Improvement Sections
285333CP-HLT/P3-1/3
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic
Analysis
A303 Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis v1.3.docx Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff January 2013 for Somerset County Council
- i -
APPENDIX
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
WHOLE SCHEME
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 897,285 882,714 0 14,571 Vehicle operating costs 2 -109,606 -109,606 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -144 0 0 0 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 787,535 773,108 0 14,571
User Benefits Travel Time 5 1,043,577 610,434 427,555 5,588 Vehicle operating costs 6 -73,507 -14,949 -58,558 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -167 0 0 0 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 969,903 595,485 368,997 5,588 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -310 0 0 -310 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 0 0 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 969,593 595,485 368,997 5,278
Benefits 1,757,128
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 3,443 Investment Costs 814,644 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 818,087
Indirect Tax Revenues -135,144
Broad Transport Budget 818,087 Wider Public Finances -135,144
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -29,730 Journey Ambience - Accidents 161,858 Consumer Users 787,535 Business Users and Providers 969,593 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 1,889,256 Public Accounts 818,087 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 818,087 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 1,071,169 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 2.31
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 1: A303 AMESBURY TO BERWICK DOWN 1
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 176,835 173,963 0 2,872 Vehicle operating costs 2 -28,098 -28,098 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -28 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 148,709 145,865 0 2,872
User Benefits Travel Time 5 205,666 120,303 84,262 1,101 Vehicle operating costs 6 -18,844 -3,832 -15,012 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -33 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 186,789 116,471 69,250 1,101 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -61 -61 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 186,729 116,471 69,250 1,041
Benefits 335,437
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 1,704 Investment Costs 403,113 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 404,817
Indirect Tax Revenues -66,874
Broad Transport Budget 404,817 Wider Public Finances -66,874
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -5,675 Journey Ambience - Accidents 59,320 Consumer Users 148,709 Business Users and Providers 186,729 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 389,082 Public Accounts 404,817 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 404,817 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) -15,735 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 0.96
Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 2: A303 WYLYE TO STOCKTON WOOD 2
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 3,353 3,298 0 54 Vehicle operating costs 2 -1,808 -1,808 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 0 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 1,544 1,490 0 54
User Benefits Travel Time 5 3,900 2,281 1,598 21 Vehicle operating costs 6 -1,213 -247 -966 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -1 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 2,686 2,034 632 21 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -1 -1 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 2,685 2,034 632 20
Benefits 4,230
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 55 Investment Costs 13,060 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 13,115
Indirect Tax Revenues -2,167
Broad Transport Budget 13,115 Wider Public Finances -2,167
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -72 Journey Ambience - Accidents -2,201 Consumer Users 1,544 Business Users and Providers 2,685 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 1,957 Public Accounts 13,115 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 13,115 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) -11,158 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 0.15
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 3: CHICKLADE BOTTOM TO MERE 3
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 104,261 102,568 0 1,693 Vehicle operating costs 2 -8,376 -8,376 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -17 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 95,868 94,192 0 1,693
User Benefits Travel Time 5 121,260 70,930 49,680 649 Vehicle operating costs 6 -5,617 -1,142 -4,475 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -20 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 115,623 69,788 45,205 649 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -36 -36 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 115,586 69,788 45,205 613
Benefits 211,455
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 292 Investment Costs 69,147 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 69,440
Indirect Tax Revenues -11,471
Broad Transport Budget 69,440 Wider Public Finances -11,471
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -3,578 Journey Ambience - Accidents 26,518 Consumer Users 95,868 Business Users and Providers 115,586 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 234,395 Public Accounts 69,440 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 69,440 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 164,955 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 3.38
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 4: A303 SPARKFORD TO ILCHESTER 4
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 75,701 74,471 0 1,229 Vehicle operating costs 2 -13,230 -13,230 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -12 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 62,459 61,241 0 1,229
User Benefits Travel Time 5 88,043 51,500 36,071 471 Vehicle operating costs 6 -8,873 -1,804 -7,068 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -14 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 79,156 49,696 29,003 471 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -26 -26 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 79,130 49,696 29,003 446
Benefits 141,589
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 120 Investment Costs 28,376 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 28,496
Indirect Tax Revenues -4,707
Broad Transport Budget 28,496 Wider Public Finances -4,707
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -2,396 Journey Ambience - Accidents 27,994 Consumer Users 62,459 Business Users and Providers 79,130 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 167,188 Public Accounts 28,496 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 28,496 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 138,692 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 5.87
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 5: A303 PODIMORE ROUNDABOUT 5
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 56,826 55,903 0 923 Vehicle operating costs 2 -174 -174 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -9 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 56,642 55,729 0 923
User Benefits Travel Time 5 66,091 38,659 27,077 354 Vehicle operating costs 6 -117 -24 -93 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -11 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 65,963 38,636 26,984 354 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -20 -20 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 65,943 38,636 26,984 334
Benefits 122,585
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 63 Investment Costs 14,883 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 14,946
Indirect Tax Revenues -2,469
Broad Transport Budget 14,946 Wider Public Finances -2,469
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -2,074 Journey Ambience - Accidents -14 Consumer Users 56,642 Business Users and Providers 65,943 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 120,497 Public Accounts 14,946 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 14,946 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 105,551 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 8.06
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 6: A303 SOUTH PETHERTON TO SOUTHFIELDS 6
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 101,954 100,298 0 1,656 Vehicle operating costs 2 -33,952 -33,952 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -16 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 67,987 66,346 0 1,656
User Benefits Travel Time 5 118,576 69,360 48,581 635 Vehicle operating costs 6 -22,770 -4,631 -18,139 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -18 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 95,788 64,730 30,442 635 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -33 -33 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 95,755 64,730 30,442 602
Benefits 163,742
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 152 Investment Costs 35,888 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 36,039
Indirect Tax Revenues -5,954
Broad Transport Budget 36,039 Wider Public Finances -5,954
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -2,770 Journey Ambience - Accidents 29,343 Consumer Users 67,987 Business Users and Providers 95,755 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 190,314 Public Accounts 36,039 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 36,039 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 154,275 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 5.28
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 7: A303 CARTGATE ROUNDABOUT 7
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 54,625 53,738 0 887 Vehicle operating costs 2 -238 -238 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -9 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 54,378 53,500 0 887
User Benefits Travel Time 5 63,531 37,162 26,029 340 Vehicle operating costs 6 -160 -32 -127 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -10 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 63,361 37,129 25,901 340 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -19 -19 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 63,341 37,129 25,901 321
Benefits 117,719
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 75 Investment Costs 17,773 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 17,848
Indirect Tax Revenues -2,948
Broad Transport Budget 17,848 Wider Public Finances -2,948
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -1,992 Journey Ambience - Accidents 14,599 Consumer Users 54,378 Business Users and Providers 63,341 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 130,326 Public Accounts 17,848 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 17,848 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 112,478 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 7.30
Central Government Funding: Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 8: A358 SOUTHFIELDS TO M5 J25 8
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 290,944 286,220 0 4,725 Vehicle operating costs 2 -14,319 -14,319 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -48 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 276,578 271,901 0 4,725
User Benefits Travel Time 5 338,379 197,933 138,635 1,812 Vehicle operating costs 6 -9,603 -1,953 -7,650 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -55 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 328,721 195,980 130,985 1,812 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -102 -102 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 328,619 195,980 130,985 1,710
Benefits 605,197
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 627 Investment Costs 148,284 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 148,910
Indirect Tax Revenues -24,599
Broad Transport Budget 148,910 Wider Public Finances -24,599
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -10,240 Journey Ambience - Accidents -5,503 Consumer Users 276,578 Business Users and Providers 328,619 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 589,454 Public Accounts 148,910 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 148,910 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) 440,544 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 3.96
Central Government Funding: Transport
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Appendix 1 - TEE Outputs by Section January 2013
SECTION 9: A303 SOUTHFIELDS TO HONITON 9
Comparable to Table 15 in the EIS: TEE Table All units £'000 discounted to 2002 prices
Impact Total Cars/LGVs OGVs PSVs
User Benefits Travel Time 1 32,787 32,255 0 532 Vehicle operating costs 2 -9,411 -9,411 0 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 3 -5 During maintenance 4 0 0 0 0 NET CONSUMER USER BENEFITS 23,371 22,844 0 532
User Benefits Travel Time 5 38,133 22,305 15,623 204 Vehicle operating costs 6 -6,311 -1,284 -5,028 0 Travel time and vehicle operating costs: During construction 7 -6 During maintenance 8 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 31,815 21,022 10,595 204 Private Sector Provider Impacts Operating Costs -11 -11 Other Business Impacts Developer and other contributions 0 NET BUSINESS IMPACT 31,805 21,022 10,595 193
Benefits 55,176
Comparable to Table 16 in the EIS: Public Accounts - assuming 100% Central Government Funding
Present Value of Transport Economic Efficiency
CONSUMER USER BENEFITS
A303 A358 A30: Corridor Improvement Programme Phase 3 - Sectional Economic Analysis
Operating Costs 356 Investment Costs 84,121 Developer and Other Contributions 0 NET IMPACT 84,476
Indirect Tax Revenues -13,955
Broad Transport Budget 84,476 Wider Public Finances -13,955
Comparable to Table 17 in the EIS: AMCB
Noise - Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -934 Journey Ambience - Accidents 11,802 Consumer Users 23,371 Business Users and Providers 31,805 Reliability Not assessed Option Values - Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 66,044 Public Accounts 84,476 Present Value of Costs (PVC) 84,476 OVERALL IMPACTS Net Present Value (NPV) -18,432 Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 0.78
Central Government Funding: Transport
Central Government Funding: Non-Transport