letter from member of parliament for leicester south ... · y ~''% /-sou~ yf fields\j ~...

$: Letter from Member of Parliament for Leicester South ... · Y ~''% /-Sou~ yF fields\J ~ `/ ~~. ,~ i ... ~ ~/ / .l~~1~ z",\ Km~ton Fiel , ... 4Upperton Rd E Outbound 4E5 E06 121 25°0$
Leicester —Putney Road West Improvement Scheme

ANNEXES

1 Section A3• Map showing location of the project and its wider context

2 Section A8• LEP support letter• Housebuilder /developer evidence letter (Awaiting receipt)

3 Section B2• Scheme option 3a (Preferred)

4 Section B5• Projects impact pro forma (must be a separate MS Excel)• Putney Road Saturn Modelling — LLITM Local Area LMVR Review Report

• Appraisal summary table5 Section B7

• Project plan/Gantt chart6 Section B9

• Governance Chart7 Section B10

• Project Risk Assessment /Register8 Section B11

• Stakeholder Support Letterso Leicester City Football Clubo Leicester Tigers Rugby Football Clubo University of Leicester

• Stakeholder and Communications Plan9 Section B12

• Letter from Member of Parliament for Leicester South Jonathan Ashworth

I~%7

ANNEX 1

Section A3• Map showing location of the project and its wider context

~T"~ • c ~,,,~/ ZT .

~

~

~ ~ w ~~7 ~ ~ S i ~ ~~:~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~d=~` _ ~ ja~ ~~̂puW. Inner Ring Roatl ~ t —~/\

W es

7r ~~ ~ De Monttort Universi , ~~ ~~"~ / /l. "'~ )/ ' / /

'~, M, -~ /~ ! ~° l,~~~̀ ,C~msJr~~~~

„~~; ~~; _cs~ ~''% /-Sou~►yF fields\J ~ `/ ~~. ,~ iY

~,~,, y ` Leicester Royai J/// O ~~~ ~~L~ ^ ~ ~ ~~~ " Infirmary Hospital ' ~\ '/. Q ~" m ,~ ~C

~~aI ~ ~ i ~`

~~~` _-~ J r ~Di'w"•^ Highfields ?, ~~

~~/, ~~,\ ~ ~ay~~~ '-~ ~ Leicester RFC Stadium

~~ `, ~_ ~ ~ ~ ,y : ,„ I ~ LEICESTER ` ~ ~-~ I ~ ~•~ J ~.+<%g~ rl `o ~ 1 , `-- `~univers'dy of Leicester / p ~`~ a ,..,.

~̀~~ y~ ~ /~~~

LCFC Stadium Freemans Common Leisure Park ~~ ~,a.>

~ ~~ ~ \ '~ Freemans ~ \ ~`~t I ~ Common ~

~J .w

~ ''~~-^ ~ ,~ - ~ Nixon ~ ~ u°r~~~ ~, British Gas ~ Coud ' ~ - ~ ~- ~ i

~p ., •~~ . . GA5199

~ .-~. „_, ~ ~ Commercial Square Business Park ~ . r ~ ~ ~ ~

' _ VYab ~ ; ~~~ A I __ice ~ ( ~~~~ ~ - t I` ,~ a' 6ID~~1 ~. ""_" ~ _ '~ "~ / 1 JI ./. 10.. i . .1\. p St Mary's ~

C !~ Allotments ~/ \ C _ ~ r ~ 1 ~cF"! ~. ~,' • _ ;:

b. °~cessa ~ - N

~~s ~ ~ .~ ~ ~/ / .l~~1~ z",\ Km~ton Fiel , _

~ ~/~ ~~ `

f ~ ~ 0i„ _ ~~ Leicestershire County Cricket Club ~k , f ~ ~' ~ ~jr`

,~° , $t i I i 4.

> i ^~-

uramng rvurnuci

Notes

KEY

- Putney Road Scheme

Potential Developments

Sport

Leisure

Education

0 Industry

Health

COffIdOfS

Air Quality Management Area

• Air Quality Station

------------ Potential Development------------ Evesham Road Link

Area of Influence

Revision Amendment Date

Leicester~City Council

Planning, Development and Transportation

CLIENT

Putney Rd West Link

TITLE

Putney Rd West

Location Plan &

Area of InfluenceDRAWING No. REV SCALE

- 00 NTS

DRAWN BY RP DATE June 2017CHECKED JA SIZE A3

ACAD FILE - UPRN -

ANNEX 3

Section B2• Scheme option 3a (Preferred)

ANNEX4

Section B5

• Projects impact pro forma (included as a separate MS Excel)• Putney Road Saturn Modelling — LLITM Local Area LMVR

Review Report• Appraisal summary table (included as a separate MS Excel)

TECHNICAL NOTE

PUTNEY ROAD SATURN MODELLING

LLITM LOCAL AREA LMVR RCVIEW

Client/Project owner Leiccslcr bounty Council

Project F'utney~ I:o~~d SAl URN Madellin~__

Title of Document LLITM Lacal Area LMVR Review

Type of Document ~ Technical Note

Date ~ 23/06J2017

Reference number ( 1063~i3/1i_.

Number of pages ~` 1~1

0

Leicesterci~y co~~~~i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 3

2. BASE YEAR MODELLING — LMVR REVIEW 4

2.1 INTRODUCTION 4

2.2 CORDON~SCREENLINE CALIBRATION RESULTS 4

2.3 10URNEYTIME VALIDATION RESULTS 9

3. SUMMARY 13

LUTM Local Area LMVR Review 1UG343

Page 2/14

LeicesterCicy Council

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1.1 SY5TRA Ltd has been commissioned by Leicester County Council to assess the potcntiafimpacts of providing a link road between the An26 and the A5199 by implementing a traffic

scheme on Putney Road in Leicester.

1.1.2 1'he assessment of the proposed Putney Road {ink road will be undertaken using the Highways

component of the Leicester and Leicestershire Integrated Transport Model (LUTM) v5.

1.1.3 The LUTM v5 SA7UltN model has a 2008 base year and covers the whole of Leicester andLeicestershire. This model will be used as the reference case for existing conditions on the

surrounding highway network.

1.1.Q The LUTM model was calibrated and validated to cover a large area: In order to assess its

suitability for use in the Putney Road study, SYSTRA has undertaken a review of the Base Year

modelling; in the local vicinity of Putney Road. The Area of Influence (AOI) is shown in Figure

1, determined by comparing forecast model flows for the With and Without Scheme model

runs to idenXify where the scheme would have an impact. This has been agreed with LCC.

figure 1. Putney Road Scheme Location and Lowl Area of Influence

1.1.5 This Technical Note provides an overview of the LLITM v5 mode! accuracy in this AOI. It isbased on the latest version of the LMVR (Local Modelling Validation Report) for the LLITM vS

mode! and outlines the calibration and validation results of the model in the AOI. No updates

to the base year models have been made as part of this study.

Lll~'M Loral/lrea tMVR fte~iew

Page 3/14

106343

Leicestercity council

2. BASE YEAR MODELLING — LMVR REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 The Local Model Validation Report (LMVR) has been included for the 2008 LLITM v5 modeland is attached in Appendix e.

2.1.2 This section outlines the review of this LMVR in relation to the local Area of Influence (AOI)identified in Figure 1.

2.2 Cordon/Screenline Calibration Results

2.2.1 The count data used to form cordons and screenlines within the LUTM have been aggregatedinto eight different locations. Figure 2 illustrates these cordons visually and is taken directlyfrom the LMVR document.

Figure 2. Leicester City and Surrounding Area Screenlines

~~

•~~ ~

~r

M.~`~y~_-~

~

~ -r . "..~

t •~' ~ ~

t~ iy.

~~':

~!J

~ ~

1• ~~•

~

~• w a ~

• ~ ~ ~

i-~~

• .. --~q r rrr~

~ •

~ ~~-~1 r1i! \~ \~~

• 1ca►~~Nfry

~ L. r• ~ c.`.wta~ws~w.

~ ♦ • _ t

1 ~~ • • -

fcal MIS ~ # l.+~+~

• ••./ ̀ w Yw~

~ • w ~Ye [rte

2.2.2 Within the local AOI identified there is a total of 14 two-directional count locations which areshown in Figure 3. The 14 locations do not all belong to the same Cordon/Screenline. Thecounts form components of the 'City Inner Cordon', 'City Misc Counts' and 'City South E-WScreenline'.

2.2.3 These counts were used in the calibration of LLITM and are reported here to indicate theaccuracy of the model in the area around the Putney Road scheme.

LLI1M Loc:~l/\rea LMVN 12evie~v

Dare 4/14

io~3n3

0

LeicesterCity Council

Figure 3. City Inner Cordon Count Locations within AOI

N z ... ~iI_ LL.i, lk~'A ~ ~ 1~

37:

i • •.

~~~ !/ 4 8 910

.t l

6 --,~

~=i

.1 N .

,t 1

'~

.. • '~

~~, .•., lq ... ~~ 1

, . , 12

-- _ ~ ~il~~ ,'

o~i(~.,. R..

la~~nd ` , 13 _. . ..

uh~.n~ 11nY.

uhn moinli 0 O6 1 2Km

• AIY IVIM (wp{IOCYRni . . ~

A~nv(bdA Srlwma . Aie~o~ nflunxa ltiTM Cd~ni lai7oml . .

~~ r

2.2.Q The Web'TAG guideline is that 85°b of counts should pass the calibration criteria (passing

either the absolute flow guideline or have a GEH <S)

2.2.5 The results illustrated within Table 1 show that for the AM peak hour, 68°.0 of links within the

AOI pass the guideline. Table 2 shows that for the PM peak hour, 71°~ of the modelled links

within the AOI adhere to calibration criteria.

2.2.6 Further analysis indicated that a number of the links have GEH scores only marginally above

S, so an extra measure has been reported here [o include sites that were very close to passing.

Including GEH of up to 6, the AM peak hour has a total 75% of its links meet the calibration

criteria and the PM peak has 82% of its links meeting the same criteria.

2.2.7 In order to appreciate the calibration of the il~odef visually, both Figure A and d have been

produced to display whether the finks pass, fail high (modelled flows arc greater than

observed flows) or fail low (modelled flows are less than observed flows}.

ILITM Local Area lMlVR Review 1U63A3

Page 5/14


Table 1. Loca! Model Calibration Results, AM Peak Hour

•

1

...

A47 W

t •

Inbound

t .

1,107

..

1,080

t

-27

~

-2°~a

7

0.8 ✓

i

✓ ~1 A47 E Outbound 536 4b3 -73 -14°0 3.3 ~ ✓ ~2 Tudor Road N Inbound 234 208 -26 -11°0 1.7 ~ ✓ ~2 Tudor Road S Outbound 97 357 260 268% 17.2 X3 A5460 N Inbound 715 578 -137 -19°0 5.43 A5460 S Outbound 933 889 -43 •5°0 1.4 ✓ ✓ ✓4 Upperton Rd W inbound 931 Ti 1 -210 -21~io ..1 x4 Upperton Rd E Outbound 4E5 E06 121 25°0 5.2 ~5 A426 N Inbound 1.69? 1,914 222 13°0 5.2 ~ ~5 A426 S Outbound 834 ~5 -138 -17°0 5.0 x ~6 Weiford Rd N Inbound 1,117 1,078 -39 -4°-b 1.2 ✓6 4Velford Rd S Outbound S4 964 390 68°b 14.1 x7 Evinqton Rd W Inbound 556 636 80 14% 3.3 ✓ ~ ~7 Evington Rd E Outbound 238 335 97 41°b 5.7 ~ x8 A6 N Inbound 1,178 1,203 25 2°0 0.7 ~ ~ ~8 A6 S Outbound 720 335 -385 -53°0 16.8 x9 Victoria Terrace N Inbound 16 96 80 503°0 10.7 ~ % ~9 Victoria Terrace S Outbound 9 106 97 1082% 12S ~ x

10 66416 N Inbound 248 73 -175 •71~io 13.9 = x10 86416 S Outbound 547 431 -116 -2190 5.2 ~ x1 1 A6.%A563 Roundabout N A oach NB Inbound 953 976 22 2~,0 0.7 ~ ~ ~1 1 A6 A563 Roundabout N Approach SB Outbound 581 678 96 17°0 3.8 J J r12 A6`A563 Roundabout W A roach E6 Inbound 820 769 -51 -6°~b 1.8 ~ r12 A6'A563 Roundabout W Approach W B Outbound 748 679 -69 -9% 2.6 `~ `~ ~13 A563 W Inbound 1,406 1,335 -71 -5~0 1.9 Y ~ ~13 A563 E Outbound 1,868 1,868 0 0% 0.0 ~ ~ ~14 Braunstone Lane East N Inbound 372 475 103 23°~o 5.0 714 Braunstone Lane East S Outbound 556 547 -9 -2'0 0.4 ~

TOTAL 20.120 20.145 26 0°'0 0.2 6~°0 54°'0 68°'

LUTh~ local Ares Lh~'VR Revi@w i0c,,'~3

n r Page 6/14~~~ ~• Oo ~c N~ ̂n ~

Table 2. lvml Model Calibration Results, PM Peak Hour

• r. •

1 A47 W Inbound 633 533 -100 -16% 4.1

•

✓

7

✓ ✓

1 A47 E Outbound 1,278 1,118 -160 -13°0 4.6 ✓ ✓ ✓

2Tudor Road N Inbound 130 175 45 34% 3.6 ~ ✓ ✓

2Tudor Road S Outbound 172 357 185 106°0 11.4 x .k x

3A546~J N Inbound 655 612 -44 -7% 1.7 ✓ ✓ ✓

3A5460 S Outbound 965 978 -7 -1°0 0.2 ✓ ✓ ✓

4 Upperton Rd W Inbound 557 330 -177 -32% 8.2 x x X

4 Upperton Rd E Outbound 827 704 -123 -15% 4.4 ✓ ✓ ~

5 A426 N Inbound 899 907 7 1 °0 0.2 ✓ ✓ ~

5 A426 S Outbound 1,687 1,508 •180 -11°% 4.5 ✓ ✓ ✓

6 Welford Rd N Inbound 703 345 t42 20% 5.1 ~ ~ x

6 Welford Rd S Outbound 1,576 1,740 164 10% 4.0 ✓ ~ ~

7 Eungton Rd W Inbound 348 339 - -9 -3°b G.5 ✓ ✓

7 Eungton Rd E Outbound 567 647 80 14% 3.3 ~ ~ ~

S A6 N Inbound 614 658 44 7°0 1.7 ✓ ✓ ~

8 A6 S Outbound 1,454 1,543 89 6% 2.3 ✓ ✓

9 Victoria Terrace N Inbound 111 206 95 86% 7.5 ~ x

9 Victoria Terrace S Outbound 24 148 124 519°0 13.4 x x x

10 66416 N Inbound 314 96 -218 -69% 15.3 =~ x x

10 86416 S Outbound 251 170 -82 33% 5.6 ✓ =~ ~

1 1 A6À563 Roundabout N Approach NB Inbound 792 773 -18 -2% 0.7 ✓ ~ ✓

1 1 A6'A563 Roundabout N Approach SB Outbourcl 933 1,187 254 27°0 7.8 ~ x

12A6À563 Roundabout VJ Approach EB Inbound 783 814 31 4°~0 1.1 ~ ~ ~

12A6À563 Roundabout W Approach WB Outbound 1.103 828 -275 -25°0 8.9 ~~ - -`

13A563 W Inbound 1,~6 1.Ti8 -28 -2% 0.7 ✓ ✓ ~

t 3A 563 E Outbound 1,566 1,710 144 9% 3.6 ✓

14 Braunstone Lane East N Inbound 556 502 -54 -10% 2.3

14 B2Uf5fOrE Ldll@ EdSI S OUfb0UfK1 661 473 -18% -28% 7.9 x

TOTAL 21.985 21.728 -257 -1°b 1.7 71°b 64°~ 71'

n r LUTtJ Lccal Area lh'VR Revie~~v 106343

~• O~ Page 7/14

O yc ~y~ ~n

N

A:

Figure 5. PM Model Calibration Results

d̀ •

~ -~ ,. . _~ . . , -r . . __.~~

~ ~ ~. ~~~ ~.;.~ _~r..;

Lesend~A~es of Nlue nee ,.Schrmf lMkt

xr.~e~,~, . .Ulfenlim c~#ula (PMQ~fAll~11.GN

~ ~ _"'_"". _.__._.._. ...~iAIL.tOW ~ O 07 1 __"—'—'-"—'J 11m~

Rrtner WaASrheme ~ LL~IM UnA CailUrdron ~lr ~'L r~~ ...... _..~ .....:.~~~..,r~ u~~ .:, ....:.... ~. _.,. ... . .. .~.

lLt7M Locai Area LMVR Review 1OG343fare 8/14

LeicesterCiq Council

Figure 4. AM Model Calibration Results

2.3 Journey Time Validation Results

2.3.1 In addition to the cordon/screenline flow calibration results, journey times have also been

assessed. Within the LLITM LMVR a number of journey time routes have been identified along

with cumulative distances and Ume.

2.3.2 Sixteen journey time routes fall within Leicester and the Surrounding Area. These routes are

illustrated within Figure 6. This plot has been directly taken from tl~e LLI'fM LMVR document.

Figure 6. Leicester Clty and Surround(ng Area Journey Time Routes

i

_.~' ~ . i

.} i

.s~-~.

``~

i

;' # ~ .,'

,V, ~ vrA r--- .rn~tr M~p~lf

i! J„ ~ ~r d! ~ r~l~pD ( t~ ~~

~r~Ci tires.j'Y j ~ G~rw OA M~f ~.+~ c+` r sr.

~~~ . w

2.3.3 The journey time route data from the LLITM IMVR has been processed in order to extract the

route segments which fall within the Putney Road scheme area of influence. Validation results

for each of these journey time sections have been presented in both the inbound and

outbound or clockwise and anti-clockwise directions. Of the 16 routes shown above, 7 journey

tame routes pass through the local area of interest. The routes are defined as follows:

O 653b6O Ah26 Blaby

O A5460Endcrby

O A6 Oadby

O A5199 Wigston

O A59A IRR

O A563 ORR1

2.3.1 The 7 journey time routes within the AOI are shotivn within Figure 7.

LUTM local Area LMvfi Review 106343

Pale 9/1A


f(gure 7. Journey Time Routes within AOI

i ~N ~ ..f.~ I~CLSI k:~.A ,

~,f•,~ _ ~

~. ,;` ~+ d\1 i .

\4

~~,

Legend `~~Amn a w~ue«c '

YMIIw Iinlf

':,~~xrenelnb

• 5w ~r~Ertwti •.. •.burly Time Roullf ~

Rose -

—A5199 Kyptnn

~aSa60 Cn;1eAV—e56)

A59~ .._._ ~.. _..~_._~~O UadUy _ 0 05 1 7Nm~QSI6d

0.ttnPy MGM s~f~pmn ~ it IIM Ipu~nry times Rou:o~ y~~

2.3.5 The Web7AG guidance indicates that 85% of journey time routes should pass the validationcriteria of 6d seconds difference between observed and modelled journey times or 15%difference, whichever value is greater.

2.3.6 Table 3 indicates that in the area of influence 71% of the AM peak journey time routes passthe guideline. Table n shows that in the PM peak, 6A% of the journey time routes pass theguideline.

2.3.7 Further analysis was done to see how many journey time sections marginally failed. Ifmodelled journey times were within 20% of observed, 79% of the journey tune routes passedin the AM peak and 86% passed in the PM peak.

2.3.8 The detailed journey time validation results Can be found in Appendix A.

IUTM Local Area LMVR Review 106343

Page 10/14

Leicestercry co~~~~i

Table 3. laal Model Journey Time Results, AM Peak Hour

65366 (Saffron') Inbound 85366.%A563 to B5366.'A426 369 411 42 11% Y

85366 {Saffron) Outbound B5366.~A426 to 65366~A563 337 315 -22 -7% Y

A426 Blaby Inbound A426,•'A563 to A426;`B5366 582 551 -31 -5% Y

A426 Blaby Outbound A426B5366 to A426,'A563 446 443 -2 -1% Y

A5460 Enderb Inbound A5460'A563 to A5460.'A47 901 835 -66 -7% Y

A5460 Enderby Outbound A5460;A47 to A5460'A563 715 625 -9d -13% Y

A6 Oadby Inbound A6.'A563 to A6.'A594 827 549 -278 -34% N

A6 Oadb Outbound A6.%A594 to A6/A563 505 460 -45 -9% Y

A5199 Wi ston Inbound A5199.-A563 to A5199.+'A594 550 553 4 1% Y

A5199 Wigston Outbound A5199lA594 to A5199rA5fi3 317 3$7 71 22% N

A594 IRR Gockvrise A594iA6 to A594.'A50 626 591 -35 -6°io Y

A594 IRR Anti-Clockwise A594,'A50 to A594.•'A6 470 295 -175 -37°o N

A563 ORR1 Clockwise A536.!A6 to A563.~ 84114 753 820 67 9°ra Y

A563 ORR1 Anti-Clockwise A563rB4114 to A563iA6 859 704 -155 -18% N

Toia I 8256 7539 -717 -9% 71 °~o

LL~TPI Lccal area Lh!VR Review 166343

m Page 11/14

n n Oo ~C y~ ~n ~

Table 4. Local Model JourneyTime Results, PM Peak Hour

••

85366 Saf~on) Inbound

t- ~ 1 •

B5366IA563 to 65366JA426

• r ^- - ~

271

• • • .

317

1

46

t

17%

t

Y85366 (Saffron) Outbound B5366'A426 to B5366~ A563 409 359 -50 -12% YA426 Blab Inbound A426~A563 to A426'65366 477 428 -50 -10% YA426 Blab Outbound A426'B5366 to A426.~A563 712 563 -149 -21% NA5460 Enderby Inbound A5460'A563 to A5460. A47 754 760 6 1% YA5460 Enderby Outbound A5460.'A47 to A546Q.~A563 858 82Q -38 -4% YA6 Oadby Inbound A6.'A563 to A6'A594 538 442 -96 -18% NA6 Oadby Outbound A6~A594 to A6.'A563 626 631 5 1% YA5199 Wi ston Inbound A5199~'A563 to A5199'A594 359 389 30 8% YA5199 W igston Outbound A5199'A594 to A5199. A563 598 665 66 11 % YA594 IRR Clockwise A594'A6 to A59~'A50 644 532 -172 -17°Io NA594 IRRAnti-Clockwise A594•~A50to A594~'A6 375 379 4 1% YA563 ORR1 Clockwise A536'A6 to A56~'B4114 669 773 105 16°% NA563 ORR1 Anti-Clockwise A563'B4114 to A563'A6 1036 810 -226 -22°o N

Total 8326 7869 -458 -5°0 64°e

n r LUTE Lcc21 arez L4'VR Review 106343

o~• O Page 12/14

r,~ ~—~

3. SUMMARY

3.1.1 This technical note outlines the 2008 LLtTM Highway Model calibration for the Area ofInfluence of the Putney Road scheme. This is a su~iimary of results which were included in theLU~fM v5 LMVR, and no modelling has been undertaken to improve model calibration andvaMidaEion as part of this study.

3.1.2 1"he review of the calibration and validation has identified that there are 14 two-directionallink counts with data that fall within the boundary of the identified area of influence. Thereare 7 journey time routes with data in both directions thit pass through the Area of Influence.

3.1.3 Table 5 presents a summary of the calibration and validation results for the local AOI. Theresults indicates that during the AM peak, 68°l~ of link counts calibrate to the required criteriaand 719' during the PM peak. The results also show that 71% of journey times validate to therequired criteria during the AM peak and 64%during the NM peak.

Table 5. Calibration and VaHdatfon Summa►y, Local Area of Interest

~~

Link Counts (28} -Calibration

Journey Times (14}Validation

Pass either DMRf3 or GLIi Criteria 683'a 71%

Within 1SYo of observed, or GOs if Preater 7190 64'0

3.1A Some further analysis was done to check how many flow sites and journey time route wereclose to meeting the guideline criteria. Table 6 presents a summary of these revisedcalibration and validation results for the local AOI which includes sites which pass or are closeto passing. This table indicates that the area of influence was very dose to meeting WebTAGguideline criteria.

Table 6. Calibration and Validation Summary, Local Area of Interest —Pass or Close to Passing

~~

Link Counts (LS) -Calibration Pass either DMR[3 or G[II Criteria

Journey Times (14) -Within 15~Yo of observed, or 60s if greater

Validation

LIITM Loral Area LMVR Review 1UG343

Pare 13/14

75% 82`Ya

79in 8G'%


Version Name Position Date Modfflcations

~ ~ AssistantAuthor I S Scarrott ~ j Transport 20/06/2017

'. ~j ~ j ; F~lanner_ -

~1 Checked

~ j PrincipalM Millard ~ '; Transport 21/06/2017

by _~ ` Planner

Approved !--

~D lrons

~— I Director k 23/06/2017

~y _ —~ ------~ L--.- { - __ __ _ _ ---_- -

~2 byccked_

_._i~_~~__.~.1 l_----._.~.~

~Y proved

~------ ~~-- ~-~ ~_ ~~

--- ---- - ------

LLITM local Area LMVR Review 106343

Page 14/14

0


LLITM JOURNEY TIME ROUTE SEGMENTS WITHIN AOI


Journey Time Routes within Area of Influence - AM Peak

~ .85399 Sallron Inbound 853G6+A563 to 8536G~The Fainva b0 115 35 43'o Y85399 5ailron Inbound 85366.~TM Fainva to 85366 Kniahlon Lang East I~ 145 -54 ~27?'_ Y85395 (Saffron) Inboun~J 65366 Knighton Lano Easl to 8536G~A426 50 151 51 r-,g=:o N

o a 369 411 42 11% Y85399 (S~flron Oultv~und 85366~A426 to 8536ra~Kni hton Lane Eact 1 15 t30 IS 1310 Y85359 Sallron) Uulbound 85366 1<ni hton Lane East to B536C,~Th~ Fainva~ 104 78 -27 -2696 Y85395 f~aliron) Outbound 85366.-The Fairway to 85366A563 1 18 t07 -IO -9'.•~ Y

o a 337 315 •22 •7°6 YA426 Blab Inbound A426.rA563 to A426'Wi ston Lang 264 284 20 7'r. YA426 61nb Inbaund A42G~VJi slon l.am to A42&~853G6 318 267 -51 -16°J Y

Totol 582 551 •31 •5% YA426 Blaby Outbound A426 B536f, ~o A42&VJigston Lane 307 265 -37 -12'% YAd26 81aby Outbound A42&'4Nigston lar~ io A~26'A563 139 174 35 25`,o Y

Total 446 449 4 -1% VA5460 EnderG Inbound ASa60.A563 to A546Q Fosse Park 52 1 10 58 112`6 YA5460 Enderby Inbound A54GO.Foss? Park to A5460~Braunston~ Larx~ 215 21 I •4 -2;~ YA546C1 En~+rb Inbound ASd50 Braunstone Lane to A546Q'U rtan Road 44~ 237 -206 -46'~ PIg5q60 Enderb Inbound A5460 U enon Road to A54uQ Hinckle Road 122 12a 2 2?~ YA5460 Enderby Inbound A5460. Hinckley Road to A5460+A47 70 152 83 1 19 ;', N

o q 901 895 •66 •790 YA5360 Enderb Outbound A560 A47 to A5460'Hinckle Road 37 74 a3 115°o YA54G0 End~~rb Outbound A5460 Hinckle Road to ASd60 U nhon Road 288 131 -157 -54°a P!A5460 Enderb Outtwund A5460.~U ertun Road to A546Q'8raun.tone Lane 196 213 17 9'/, YA5460 En~rb Outbaund AS-ifiO~Braunstono Lane to A546Q'fosso Park 134 143 9 7',6 YAgdnC1 Enderby Outbound A5460 Fos:,e Park to A5460 A563 51 59 -2 -3?o Y

Total 715 625 •90 -1~% YA6 Oad Inbound AE~ASS3 to AG+A6030 2b8 Ib5 -123 -~2?: NA6 Oad Inbound A6?A6~30 to AG+856Bd86416 279 190 -85 •32't tdA6 Oadby Inbound A6.~8568~864I610 A6~Ervinplon Rd'Granville Rd 106 85 -21 -20?'. YA6Oadby Inbound AG.~Ervington Rd'Granvilie Rd to A6A594 154 109 -~15 -29'r;. Y

o a 827 549 •278 -34°/, NA6 Oad •Outbound A6'A59a to A&'Envn ton Rd Granvillo Rd 102 I OB E 6'/ YA6 Oadby Outbound A6 Ervington Rd'Granvilb Rd to A~ B56aBG416 G5 52 -I ~ •20'b YAEOad Outbound A6.B568.~BF,4tF,~eAG%A6030 2Q0 182 -17 -9%; YA6 Oadtr Outbound At;A6030 to AG A563 I39 I I8 -21 • t 5°~~ Y

Total 505 460 •45 -9°k YA5199 Wiaslon Inbound ASt94rASG3 to A5199i8568 439 33d -tnq .2a?; NA5159 W igston Inbound A5199%6568 to A5199.~A594 1 I I 219 108 57?o N

o ;1 550 553 4 1% YA51591Yi ston Outbound A5t93 A59d to A5199.~8568 84 1 t4 3p 36?% YA5199 YJiaston Outbound A5195 85E8 to A5159 A553 233 273 4~ 17°;~ Y

Total 317 387 71 22°b NA5g4 IRR Clockwi,e A594r'A610 A594+A426 309 771 E2 20 o NA594 IRR Clochwi:.e A54~1+A426 to A594 O,clord SLT~owarke SI 190 124 -66 -35'< Ng5y4 IRR Clockwi:r_ A594 OKlord S4Newarke St to A594'A50 127 95 -3I -25',o Y

Total 626 591 -35 •6°~ YA554 IRR Anti-Cla:kwise A594iA50 to A594 ~~ford SYN~warko St 110 70 -41 -37 ~b Yg5g4 1RR Anti-Clc}chtivi,e A594 Oxford St~Newarfce SI to A594 bNellord Rd+Ti ers Wa 182 131 -51 -28 ~~ YA5941RRAnli-Cir~kwise A5941'JelfordRd%Ti rsWa toA594/A6 178 95 -89 ~47'~ N

Total 470 295 -175 -37°o NA563 URR 1 Cloch~vise A563+A6 to A563'A51 ~9 134 194 55 34 io YA5630RR~ Claclnvi~ A563?A5159toA56305366 217 224 7 3'r~ YA5630RRiClochwise A563~B536btoA563'A426 257 241 -1& ~E'r: YA5E3 ORRt Cloch~vise A563~A426 ro A563B41 t3 145 161 17 I I`~ Y

ota 753 820 67 9% YA563 ORR 1 Anti-Clock~vis~ A563~&1114 to A56a~A426 256 17E -80 •314'o NA563 ORR t ANi-Clockwise A563~A426 to A563 853G6 136 150 14 I I °io YA563 ORR t An6-Clockwise A563~85366 to A563~A5199 251 245 -5 -2'~ YA5630RR1Anti-Clock~+nse A563.~AS1991oA563~A6 216 132 -84 -39'~ N

Total 859 704 -155 -18°6 N

O

Leicesterc~~y co~~~~i

Journey Time Routes within Area of Influence - PM Peak

.„

85399 Saffron Inbound B5366fA563 to 85366/The Fainva 73 95 22 30 ;o Y

85399 ~Salfron) Inbound 85366/The Fairway to 85366~Knighton Lang East 93 1 t6 23 24°o Y

85399 tSalfron) Inbound 85366-Knighton Lane East to 85366~A426 104 106 2 2'ro Yota 271 317 46 17°,6 Y

85399 Salfron) Uutbaund 85366~A426 to 85366%Kni hton Lane East 179 120 -59 -33'/~ Y

85399 (Safironl Out~cund 85366:Knighton Lane East to B536G~The Fairway 134 104 -30 •22'a Y

85359 (Saffron) OutMund 85366.~The Fairway to 85366'A563 95 135 39 41~i~ Yota 409 359 •50 -1296 Y

A42b 61ab~ Inbound A426!A563 to Ad2a~Wi stun Lane 27& 212 -64 -23~'b M

Ad26 Blab lnt~ound A426~Wiaston Wm to A~26'85366 201 21b 14 7'/o YTotal 477 428 •50 •10°a Y

A426 81ah Outbound A426~85366to A326hNi ;ton Lane X59 386 -173 -31'b N

Aa26 Blab Outbound A426:1'Vi ,ten Lam toA42f~A563 153 17E 25 16`.o YTotal 712 563 -149 -2t96 N

A5460 Endertr~ Inbound A5460 A563 to ASd60 Fosse Parh 6•t 95 3 t 48°o Y

A54bU Ende Inbound A5460±Fosse Par{c ro A5460.Braun,tone Lary 25? 185 -E8 -27'; PJ

A5450 Endo Inbound A5460.~8raun;tone Land to A5460'U rton Road 272 232 9 a;. Yp,5g60 Ern~rb~ Inbound A5460~U~erton Road to A546Q~Hinckiey Read 13c 145 6 4'.-~ Y

A~-160 Enderby inbound AS-S60 Hinck.by Road to A5460 A47 76 104 2& 379' Yota 754 760 6 1°b Y

A546~~ Enderb OutL~ur,d A560.'A47 to A546Q Hinckle Road 55 73 17 31i~ Y

AS-1o0 Enderby Outticund AS-i60. Hinckley Road to A5460;Upperton Road [EO 1 SE -124 -44'~ N

A5460 Enderb Outbound A5460!U rton Road to A5460Braunstene Lang 26? 343 79 30`~o N

A5460 Enter dutt~urvd AS-36~~Braunstone Lane to ASd66'Fosse Park 1 ~2 i83 21 135;, YgSqF,p Enderby Outtrcurd A546~~Fo,:£ Park to A546Q%A563 ~6 66 -31 •32'.b Y

o ~ gsg 820 -38 -4°~a Y

Au O3dtr~ In~un~f A6 A563 to A6 AG030 122 129 7 5?'~ Y

A6 Oadtr• I~beund A6 A6030 to A5'65h886.116 15 151 -19 -t I?~ Y

A6 Oadby Intiourrd AE 8568 BE#into AF Ervingt~in Rd Grarnil~e Rd 8C 73 -6 -8'S Y

A5 Gadtry I~L+~un~ A6~Ervington Rd'GranviiW Rd to A6A594 1c? 6S a7 -a6~t r~

Total 538 442 •96 -18°6 N

b6 Oad ~ Gu;bound A6 A59d to A6'crvi !on Rd GranwOo Rd t ~ ~ 150 4-3 41 ̀S Y

Ab Cladby Outbound A6. Ervington R~1'Granviile Rd to A6~856&'86416 ~9 51 -~7 •48','< Y

A5 0ad Ou~bound A6'B568iBF416 to A&'A6030 2?a 267 13 5''. Y

A~ Oada Outbound A6:A6Q30 to A~-A563 t=9 144 -~ -3?0 YTotal 626 631 5 1°a Y

ASiy9',tiiq;tan Inbourn~ A5199/A563 toA51yQ~8568 ~i 271 `1 2s;;, Y

A514y~,uigstartlnbound A5199%B568toA51S9~A594 t38 1 16 -21 -t5'/ YTotal 359 389 30 Bno Y

p5~U4 ~~'y ~p~ttn G'u1L+ound A`I~s~A594 to A5144+8568 1?I 244 7s S3 io N

A515° bViq;t~n Oubound A519~ 8568 to A519a'A563 ~2p -2?6 Y

ot~ 598 665 66 11°o Y

A5941RRG~cclovi~+ A594rA610A553'A426 ~~E 295 -1 G':'. Y

A594 IRR ~;[~ekv~ise A59~+A42h to A594 Oxford SLNn~varkn St 25? 13~ -127 -4E';'c M

A59d !RR C:6o•~kwiSE~ A544 Oxlctd S1 tJ~ttierke St to A594+'A50 9G 1 p5 iG 105t_ 1''ota 64t 532 -112 -17'.a N

A594 iRR Anti-CEc~hwi~c A55~~A50 to A594 Clxtcrd S4'NewarF:e St IOt sd SI`~ Y

A594 iRA Anti-C€c~k~vise A59a Oxicrd St'tde~varke St to A59~ ~,Vellord Rd'Tloers ~,va t:' i 80 33 22°i;, Y

A594 1RR Anti-CFc~k~visF A59S ;Nelford Rd'Tigeis Stay to A53s.Afi i ~ 1 58 -53 -35'% N

ota 375 379 4 1% Y

A563 QRR1 Clockvti:~ A5S3iA6 to ASb3'A5199 13_ 183 50 385b 'f

A5b30RR1 Clockvi:,a A563.'A5199t~A56985366 2i5 9 5'.~ Y

ASb30RR1Cloclnvi~ ASE3~B5366toASti3A426 18= 2I5 31 1750 Y

A5630RRtCl~~ek~v6se A56?~A426t-oA55.B4114 1<c t;~ t4 IO`.~ Y

Total 6fi9 773 105 76°a N

A5630RR1Ana-Ctc~ck~vi~ A563.B41 ~4[oASb:~A426 »~- 204 •260 -56'.'~ N

A563ORR1An9-G:~k~oi5s A563,+A426toA563B53b6 1'? 163 ID 6''~ Y

A563 ORRt knti-Cleck'~vtss A563~~B5366 to ASb3+A5159 25~i 41 t79~;, Y

A563 0RR 1 Antl-Clc,,k~vise A563.rA5 ~ 99 to ASE3'A6 i ~' 14Q - 7 7 - t 1'.~ Y

Total tU36 810 -226 -22?6 N

O

Leicesterc~cy ca~~~~i

ANNEX 5

Section B7

• Project plan/Gantt chart

iD Task Name Duration Start Fnish Prede[~ ResourceNames

1st carter 3rd carter 1st arter 3b carter 1st er

Oct Jan Jul Oct Jan r lul Oct Jan r

1 Putney Road link

Project Tasks

appraisal of design options

Equal'dy Impact Assessment

quantified Risk Assessment

NPIF bid submission

(Additional Modelling

(Design

(Prelim Design

RSA1

D~iled Design

RSA2

Fnal Duign

Tender Process

Approvalfor MHA/EG

Mini competition

ECI

Target Price agreed

City Mayor/Tra~rsport Lead Approval

Consultation

Consultation preparation

Internal Stakeholder consultation

Public consultation

Statutory consultation

Statutory Procedures

Surveys

Site investigation

TROD

Road Reclassification -to be decided

Construction

Service diversion/protection

Putney Road/Ayle;tone Road junction

Pufiey Road

RSA3

475 days

55 days

25 days

25 days

SO days

45 days

65 days

20 days

SS days

?5 days

45 days

40 days

55 days

130 days

20 days

10 days

40 days

40 days

40 days

39 days

130 days

130 days

195 days

195 days

45 days

110 days

60 days

20 days

Mon 03/07/1: Fri 26/04/19

Mon 03/04/li Fri 16/06/17

Mon 29/OS/1~Fri 30/06/17

Mon 29/05/1 i Fri 30/06/17

Mon 24/04/liFri 30/06/17

Mon 03/07/1 i Fri 01/09/17

Mon 03/04/liFri 30/06/17

Mon 03/07/liFri 28/07/17

Mon 03/07/li Fri 27/10/17

Mon 30/10/17 Fri 01/12/17

Mon04/12/21 Fri 02/02/15

Mon 64/09/IiFri 27/10/17

Mon 30/10/lifri 12/O1J18

Mon 30/10/27 Fri 27/04/18

Mon 02J04/lE Fri 27/04/18

Mort 30/04/lE Fri li/OS/18

Mon 08/O1/IEFri 02/03/18

Mon OS/03/1EFri 27/64/18

Mon OS/03/lEfri 27/04/18

Mon OS/03/lEThu 26/04/18

Mon 02/10/1 i Fri 30/03/18

Mon 02/10/2 i Fri 30/03/18

Mon 02/1Q/li Fri 29/06/18

Mon 02/10/1: Fri 29/06/18

Mon 02/07/lE Fri 31/03/18

Mon 02/07/1: Fri 30/11/18

Mon 07/01/1~Fri 29/03/19

Mon Ol/04/1 Fri 26/04/19

9

11

11

11

21

21

21

13

13

32

All

SW

1A

SC,DF

DF

PP,KP

lA

JA

JA

JA

Team

JA

SW,RP

JED

~~

~ a~

~A ~

~ ~

~ uAF

~ DF

~

~

~ A

~A

~

I ~

~ ■

i ~A

~ ~

T~

~A

SW,RP

JED

z

3 (Preliminary

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

]3

14

15

16

17

18

~

~1

21

22

23

24

25

26

Z7

~

~

30

31

32

33

34

ProjectPumeyRdpragrammel6

Date: Fri 16/O6J17

Ta,k

Split

Milestone

Summary

~ Project Summary

.~.,.....~.,.....~. ExtemalTasks

♦ External Milestone

~~ InactiveTas&

~—'—~

°"~-"--`-`~,

4

~

Inactive Milestone Manual Summary Rollup ~~o Deadline

InactrveSummary ~~--Ci Manual5ummary ~Y Progress

Manual Tazk ~ Start-Doty C

~ Du2tion-Doty .--.-:~-:-..-..-:.:.. . Finish only ]

i

Page 1

Le stercry co~~~~i

ANNEX 6

Section B9

• Governance Chart

NPtF — Puiney Road West Link

Project Governance

3 LCC Governance'1 Sir Peter Soulsby, City Mayar! Cilr Clarke, Assistant City MayorI Alison Greenhill (S151 Officer)

Protect BoardAndrew Smith Director TransAorta~on Senior Responslbie OwnerProject Support Stakeholders

Procurement Officer Stuart Maxwell City Transport Director Senior User, Senior Supplier Dzparmert far 3ransport (co-fonder)Data collections, monitoring (Mdrew John Dowson Mafor Transport Projects Manager ~~p

Webster) Jo Aitken Transport Development Officer University of LeicesterAdmin Officer Fnance Representative of S151 O(ticer Pro)ect Assurance Local 3usinesses

Legal Services Ofticer Project Assurance

John Dowson Project ManagerJoanna AitFcen Assistant Project Manager

Protect TeamJohn Qawson Scheme Manager

Joanna Aitken Protect Management LeadSteve tiYanvick Data, Land, Legals

Fravin Patel Design LeadNaresh Parr~holi Estimates, Contract Supervisor.

James Spencer LInSIG, microsimutaUonKafpesh Parn+ar Design

R2dhika Patel TROs & PM assistanceJay Parn~ar Area Traffic ControlCasrtractor Representatives

Stave Cooper CDM15 Assurance

Work Package Work PackageNPIF Bid (Edwards & Modelling {LEITH

Edwards) Team~SYSTRA}

Work PackageDesign {Pravin Patel, ,Katpesh Parmar.Naresh P2ncholi.3ames Spencer)

Work PackageTraffic RegulationOrders (SteveWarwick, RadhiKa

Patet)

Work PackageConstruction stage{Naresh Pancholi,Midlantls HighwayAlliance, Medium

Schemes Frameworkp

Work PackageStakeholder Management,Communications (Joanna

55

ANNEX 7

Section B10

• Project Risk Assessment /Register

Putney Road West Link Transport Project Risk Assessment/Register Date completed: 16!06,2017Completed by (Risk Register Owner): John Dowson

Business Risk Consequence:effect: Existing Risk ScoR with Funb2r managemem Target Score Cost (af Impaq: of Risk Owrer Risk Rev~2wOD}PCttVB what wou7dactu.~lly apions camrols existing actions~cornrols required. with further current controls; of fOffiopr Date

7uAPp~ ~s a resat? ~11hat am you doing ro measures (1Yhat would you tike ro do management futther controls) responsible forHowmvcnofa

a°hem w°~dd a 6e~~~9ethisnow?) inaddldontoyourexisting actions' managingnsk

Vltut is tlwTo whom and wiry?

controls?) controls and controls)p~Oble m~h~z.7~d? t uit6dBQ

ISc~e Scoring

W'IM1.~E l s R !ham wis prevent you Table) (See Scorirx~!rum meeting yowobJecrrves? Table)

$ ~ M q 8 g'

s g ~_ € F ~_

ca

~2G~elay in project as Framework conFract 3 t 3 Prepare a succession ? t £3.000 Ongoingwill need to hire with consultants in plan and share some

Loss ofi key staffmare stall to take place. responsibilities Pro ect

Jon roles, increrse FAanagerin cost ifi need touse consultants

_nsuresuffiei2n4 Inaaurat?

:~c3s ing ra is coun s

scheme4

turning movementsresources to

Unavailability at modelling,have been used. The Further junction S~ traffic

run the o eatFr 1 -accurate ILITPA fuming inappropriaFe desgin is limited due counts can 5e

flows+particularfyiuturedesign,4o its location,

3 4 t2undertaken which can

t 2 2 £16,000 Designer Se~r1;predicEed turning congestion at

Additional courts be fed iNo the malel 'a

movements) junction onhati~e been influence and ensure an

compJebart ofundertaken in the aForopriate designPast month to assistconstruction a

Using the exisitingProject construction

MFlA framework toexpected to take 8

Lengthy contractor Delay in starting procure contractor months - slip~aga inProject

procurement construc4ion and zrgage in EC! Co2 ~ 2 Programme possible as ~ 1 1 £1,OOJ

Managersec-1'r

allow sufficient time Groject would still be

to mobilisecompleted within 2 yearDfT programme

Keep City Mayor, local

Delays in obtaining Delay in startingEnsure approvals are Ward Gllrs informed at

Project. roject to run~~Temal approvals constnrc6ion builE into the project 1 1 7 all stages of work to t i 1 £500 Manager ,ray-18

in accordance plan ensure no slippage fromwith the obtaining approvalsprogramme

TROs identified andTraffic Orders not in

early discussion. Assign additional staff toplace for the required Delay in starting planning 8 2 2 a assisE with processing t 2 2 £4,500 Project J Fc• 1 atime which d?lays the constn.tctionprogramming with necessary TROs ti4~agG~

work LCC tra`fic team

0

Leicestercry co~~~~i

Putney Road West Link Transport Project Risk Assessment/Register Date completed: 16/06/2017Completed by (Risk Register Owner}: John Dowson

Buaiross Risk Consoquenoo faHvct: Existing Risk Scow with Fur~twr managomatt Target Scoro Copt (of Impaq: of Risk Owror Risk RoviawOb~acdva wha rouWacady aclionslrnrNroh oxistlng ahions~eomrols required. wiM fug curtant controls; of (Offiaor Dato

h+aa~ m e ~~►? (What aie you doing to rtwasures (What woWd you pko to do management iunhar controb) rospora~'ble forxow n«,en oI a ~p~ga this now?1 in addition to your we fisting aotansJ managing risk

W Mt iS the ~d A bs?To rlwm and Wy7 comrol3?1 comrols and comrol5)

probfam~h~ard? - roqulrod

(S~ StoringWhit Js R Ih~ wiI pmrantyou Tablca (Sao Scoring~ ̂ ~'n9Y~~l~+'~? Tabk)

8 S~~ - ~

8 S ~~-s s-'y e c

$ ~-Y

~ Q

ss~gn a i iona s a oEnsure careful work on the

Work takes longer than Project weruns planning and 2 2 4 consVuction. Work~ 2 2 £4,500 Project

5 18originally programmed ~ogramming during weekends and nights if Managerthe ECI phase not originally

nsure an accura eFurther funding target price is wnrked Seek additional funding

Costs Cost exceeds budget will need to be out during the ECI, 4 2 8 support.Furthervalue 3 1 3 £30,000 Project~~18~davailablefunding sought which may use value Manager

not be available engineering if engineering

Poor existing ~a9~~carriageway Additional cost ~ndition assessed in

advance and Discuss wish conVactorconstruction leading to and time to included in 2 2 4 at ECI and allocate time

'rf1 1 1 £7,500 Engirseer Mar-18

mare extensive project works/budget if in programme requiredreconstruction

U~oreseen additional Additional cost Liaise in advance If works required, sourceworks required to and time to with Area Traffic 3 2 6 additional funding (from 2 1 2 £5,000 Area Traffic Mar-18maintain existing P~o~~ Control regarding ATC?) CO~hO~signals signal status

Include Area Traffic Ensure public are ProjectNegative impact on the Ad+rerse public Control in informed about Manager &Project transport neNvork reaction to 2 3 6 roadworks and 2 2 4 £7,500 Area Traffic Qngoingoperarions during construction scheme programme

discussions aftemative route Controldiversions

Additional cost Using the MHA Consider joint selection Gantractor 8Dispute between ~d time to framework to reduce2 ~ 2

of contractors and back~ ~ ~ £3,750 Project Jul-18comractors project

~e risk of this being to bade contracts if Managery~ issue necessary

0

Leicesterc~~y co~~~~i

QRA cont'd....

Putney Road West Link Transport Project Risk Assessment;`Register Date completed: 16'06;`2017Completed by (Risk Register Owner): John Dowson

Business Risk Consequence:eHect: Existing Risk Scora with Futtlier managemem Target Score Cost (of Impap; of Risk Owrer Risk ReviewObjecfn.•e whst wound acva'y aaio~scorttrols existing actions comrols required. wish further current controls: of (Officer Date

happen as s rcsuh? nVhnt am you doing ro measures ('That would you like ro do management further controls? responsible farfk+w much of a ~~9e phis now?1 in addition to your existing actions managing risk

What is the orobJem woadda be?To wham and wiry?

controls?) cornrols and comrols?problem hazard? required

(See StoringWn~ is 2 rh3r wre prevent you Table) I See Scoringtram m~tlng yo~robjecfives? TabiP?

g 8 s~ S sJs -_ ~ _ ~

~ - ~ ~

Early contactwi'~hUnknown ar previously ATC and Festivals 3

Liaise with contractor

not advised local ?vent Additional test Events team to about how unforeseenArea Traffic

requires works so beand time to

ensure events are2 2 4 events could be dealt ~ t £3,754

ControlMonthly

suspended Project taken account of ir. ~h, without impacting

the programme on :he programme

All statutoryCarry out ground

Unknown services Additional costundertakers

penetrating radar surveylocated which require and time to contacted with retard ~ 2 6 of the whole work site 3 ~ 3 £11,250 Engineer & Apr-1diversion or pro•.ectior. project

to possible servicesduring th? detailed Contractor

Issues ,hey may have in thedesign phase

involving areastatutory Services nog in the All statutoryundertakers location as shown on Adc+itional cost undertakers Undertak? trial hole

ground radar.+p~aRs areand time to

conta4ted with regard~ ~ ~

irnestigations to locate' ~

~ rVc'`~~~

cngirteer &~ul-t8then discovered and to possible services services before Contra~or

requireproject

they may have in the excavation beginsdiversioa~protecti~n area


/_1~I~I~:E:

Section B11

• Stakeholder Support Letterso Leicester City Football Clubo Leicester Tigers Rugby Football Clubo University of Leicester

• Stakeholder and Communications Plan

• ~

Project Number

Project Name Putney Road West link

Project Manager John Dowson

Project Director Andrew L Smith

Assistant MayorLead

Cllr Adam Clarke

Department PTED

To identify key project stakeholders, how the project affects them, their degree of influenceetc, and to plan how and when to communicate with them. Use the stakeholder profile tableto identify all project stakeholders. When this table is complete, transfer the list of identifiedstakeholders in the stakeholder category field onto the communications plan and fill in thetable for each one. When undertaking stakeholder and communications planning ensure thatyou adhere to the Council's ̀ Duty to Involve' policy (detailed guidance on duty to involve isavailable on Insite).

~.

Version Date Author Amendment Details

01 19.06.17 JA Initial draft


. .- •

Stakeholder Priority Degree of How project Degree of Concerns or Stakeholder Managementcategory (H, M, L) influence affects group impact issues strategy &comments

(H, M, L) (H, M, L)

SchemeDelivery and

LLEP to provide letter ofsuccess may

cost of the support for project bid.result in future

project, meeting LLEP representative couldLLEP High High funding for Medium

the proposedattend project meetings

similar andoutcomes/object

as/when required.other local Otherwise, kee u dated

p

pro'ects. fives.via email.

City Mayor Delivery and

commitment cost of the Final approval for schemeCity Mayor High High

to deliver High project, is it design.

scheme. achieving the Approval to spend funding.objectives?

Scheme isEffect on local Early consultation on

MP High Mediumwithin local

Medium businesses andscheme concept. Send all

constituencyresidents.

consultation informationarea. that is sent to the ublic.

Ward Cllrs may

Constituents object to Early consultation on

City Ward would be end scheme if it scheme concept.

CouncillorsMedium Medium

users of Low impacts Send all consultation

scheme. negatively on information that is sent totheir ward or public.constituents.

UniversityMay object tostudents andscheme if it has

Early consultation onUniversity of

Medium Lowemployees

Medium negative scheme concept to requestLeicester would be end

impacts for letter of support for projectusers of the

them.bid. Keep informed.

scheme.Clubemployees

May object toand the publicscheme if it has

Early consultation onLCFC —Leicester

Medium Lowattending

Medium negative scheme concept to requestCity Football Club matches

impacts-for letter of support for projectwould be end

them. bid. Keep informed.users of thescheme.Clubemployees

May object toand the publicscheme if it has

Early consultation onLeicester Tigers

Medium Low attendingMedium negative

scheme concept to requestRugby matches

impacts forletter of support for project

would be endthem. bid. Keep informed.

users of thescheme.

Scheme could May object toscheme if it has

Early consultation onGasworks —Cadent

Low Lowaffect any

Low negativescheme concept to request

Gas futureimpacts for

letter of support for projectdevelopment.

them. bid. Keep informed.

Scheme could May object toscheme if it has Early consultation on

Westleigh Homes Low Low affect anyLow negative scheme concept to request

futureimpacts for

letter of support for projectdevelopment.

them.bid. Keep informed.

Effect on busBus priority

Bus Operating facilities.measures

Early engagement on

CompaniesMedium Medium General Low

affected as part concept to gauge supportinteresUpartne

of the scheme.for the project.

rship working.User Groups :- Ensure• Cycle City retention of

Workshop existing andNeeds are

Involve continually• Local Access provide new

incorporated throughout project byForum Medium Medium facilities for Low

within theengaging with officers

• Bus User Panel different

design.representing the various

• Leicester Local groups. groups.Taxi Forum Ensure needs

• Frei ht are

.~

Partnership incorporatedDisability Groups within design.

Businesses:- End users of

• Leicester Royal scheme.

Impact on Ensure consistentInfirmary

access and consultation on concept is• Commercial

business Impact on trade undertaken to gaugeSquare

during and and customer support to the project andBusinesses Medium Medium

after High access. match businesses'• Freemen's

construction. expectations.Common

Beneficiary Maintain access duringBusinesses

from working day to minimise

• Putney Road impact on trade.Businesses

economicrowth.

Will the publicbenefit from the

End users of scheme? Will Early engagement onPublic Medium Medium

scheme.Medium the project be concept to gauge support

considered as for the project.presenting valuefor money?

Helps todeliverobjectives in Needs to ensure Involve continually

Director -Planning,the LTP3. that scheme throughout project.

Development & High HighEnsures that

Medium identifies and Lead at project board toTransportation

the scheme fulfils the wider approve spend and

meets the Dff objectives. scheme design.

requirements.Involved in

Access/Safety/CInvolve continually

considerationrime and throughout project. Early

Emergency Services Medium Medium of safety Mediumdisorder engagement from police

aspects of theimplications.

due to location of Eustonro'ect desi n. St olice station.

Programming ofImpact on these works intransport relation to other

Traffic ManagedArea network. constructionInvolve continually

Traffic ControlHigh Medium Impact on Medium works. Impact

throughout project.construction on transportworks network duringprogramme. and after

construction.

• . • .

Stakeholder Information needs Purpose Timing or Channels Responsiblecategory (what) (Why) trigger ~hoW~ person or role

(to whom) (when) (by whom)

LLEPExplanation of how funding isspent and whether the scheme

To agree support for At project bidEmail Project Manager

meets the DfT objectives.the scheme. stage.

Explanation of how funding isTo approve scheme Regular briefings

written briefing

City Mayor spent and whether the schememeets the Dff and wider LCC

_design and local throughout the papers toscheduled

Project Manger

objectives. contribution to costs. scheme.meetings.

Scheme will impact

MPExplanation of schemeobjective, design and its impact

upon theirconstituents. At project bid Email and/or Project

as well as delivery programme To agree support for stage. meetings Manager/Directorthe scheme and tofull understand

0


•

Stakeholder Information needs Purpose Timing or Channels Responsiblecategory (what) (Why) trigger ~ho~y~ person or role


purpose of it.

City Ward Explanation of scheme Scheme will impact As part of

Councillors objective, design and its impact upon their ward and consultation Email and plan Project Manageras well as delivery programme. constituents. process

At project bid

University ofExplanation of scheme Scheme will impact stage and as part Email, plan and

Leicester objective, design and its impact upon their staff and of the meetingProject Manager

as well as delivery programme. students consultationprocess.

Explanation of schemeScheme will impact At project bid

LCFC —Leicesterobjective, design and its impact

on the club's staff stage and as partEmail and plan. Project Manager

City Football Clubas well as delivery programme.

and those attending of consultationmatches. process.

Explanation of schemeScheme will impact At project bid

Leicester Tigersobjective, design and its impact

on the club's staff stage and as part Email, plan andProject Manager

Rugbyas well as delivery programme.

and those attending of consultation meetingmatches. process.

'Scheme may have At project bidGasworks —Cadent Explanation of scheme an impact on the stage and as part

Email Project ManagerGas objective, design and its impact. business if they of consultation

choose to develop. process.

Scheme may impact At project bid

Westleigh HomesExplanation of scheme on housing stage and as part

Email Project Managerobjective, design and its impact. development of consultation

as/when it occurs. process.

As part ofAttendance at

Explanation of schemeScheme may impact consultation and

monthly BusBus Operating

objective, design and its impacton operations during design process

Operators' Group Project ManagerCompanies

as well as delivery programme.and after and as/when

meeting. Letterconstruction during the

and plan.delivery.

User Groups :-• Cycle City

WorkshopLocal Access

As part ofVia respective

Forum• Bus User Panel

Explanation of scheme Scheme may impact consultationofficers or atrespective

• Leicester Localobjective, design and its impact on local process or

meetings duringProject Manager

Taxi Forumas well as delivery programme. routes/facilities. as/when during

appropriate time• Freight

the design.in design.

Partnership• Disability

GroupsBusinesses:-• Leicester Royal

InfirmaryTo keep them

• Commercialinformed as scheme

As part ofLetter drop and

ProjectSquare Explanation of scheme

may impact onconsultation

exhibition.Manager/Public

Businesses objective, design and its impactoperations during

process orConstant liaison

Liaison

• Freemen's as well as delivery programme.

and afteras/when during

as necessary.OfficedComms

Common construction.the design. Team

Businesses• Putney Road

Businesses

Explanation of schemeFor information andto gauge support

As part of Exhibition,ProjectManagedPublic

Public objective, design and its impact and input into the consultation website &social Liaisonas well as delivery programme. design. process. media. Officer/Comms

Team

Director -Planning, Update on progress made with For delivery of widergoals of LCC & Dff. Quarterly or Regular briefings

Development & the design and delivery of the Allocation of as/when or at Project Project ManagerTransportation scheme. Monitoring of initial

sufficient resources necessary. Board meetings.funding made available for to deliver the

0


•

Stakeholder Information needs Purpose Timing or Channels Responsiblecategory (what) (Whys trigger ~ho~y~ person or role


scheme: scheme.

Email and planPartnership working as well as via

Emergency Explanation of scheme, &effect on theirOnce concept

Traffic MgtProject

Services delivery, programme and traffic operationsdesign is agreed.

monthlyManager/Engineermovements. (particularly police — meetings and

Euston St) TROconsultation.

Traffic As and when

Manager/AreaImpact on transport network, in To manage the necessary during Regular Project

Traffic Controlfinal design and during delivery. network the design meetings Manager/Engineer

process

LeicesterCfty Council

letter from member of parliament for leicester south ... · y ~''% /-sou~ yf fields\j ~...

Documents