NOTICE OF MEETING › wp-content › uploads › 2019 › … · 12.1 2016/17 CA/LEP Revenue Budget 53 - 70 12.2 2016/17 CA & Partner Capital Programmes 71 - 130 13 Sheffield City

Sheffield City Region Combined AuthorityRegistered Address: 18 Regent Street, Barnsley, S70 2HG

04 March 2016

To: Members of the Sheffield City Region Combined AuthorityAppropriate Officers

NOTICE OF MEETING

You are hereby summoned to a meeting of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to be held at AMP TECHNOLOGY CENTRE, WAVERLEY, ROTHERHAM, S60 5WG at 2.00 pm on Monday 14 March 2016 for the purpose of transacting the business set out in the agenda.

Diana TerrisClerk to the Combined Authority

This matter is being dealt with by:Craig Tyler [email protected] 01226 772824

Gill Richards [email protected] 01226 772806

Member Distribution

Councillors: S Houghton CBE (Chair), J Burrows (Vice-Chair), A Syrett, G Baxter, C Read, J Dore, S Greaves, Mayor R Jones, A Rhodes, L Roberts, L Rose, J White and A Western

Contact Details

For further information or assistance please contact

Craig TylerSCR Combined Authority18 Regent StreetBarnsleySouth YorkshireS70 2HG

Tel: 01226 [email protected]

Gill RichardsSCR Combined Authority18 Regent StreetBarnsleySouth YorkshireS70 2HG

Tel: 01226 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


2.00 PM, 14 MARCH 2016

The Technology CentreAdvanced Manufacturing ParkWaverleyRotherhamS60 5WG

AGENDA

Item Page

1 Apologies

2 Announcements

3 Urgent Items

To determine whether there are any additional items of business which by reason of special circumstances the Chair is of the opinion should be considered at the meeting; the reason(s) for such urgency to be stated.

4 Items to be Considered in the Absence of the Public and Press

To identify where resolutions may be moved to exclude the public and press. (For items marked * the public and press may be excluded from the meeting.)

5 Voting Rights for Non-Constituent Members

To identify whether there are any items of business that apply only to the South Yorkshire Members of the Combined Authority i.e. where it would not be appropriate for non-SY Members to have voting rights.

6 Declarations of Interest by individual Members in relation to any item of business on the agenda

7 Reports from and Questions by Members

8 Receipt of Petitions

9 Public Questions

Item Page

10 Minutes of the meeting held on 1 February 2016 1 - 12

11 Ratification of the Devolution Deal 13 - 52

12.1 2016/17 CA/LEP Revenue Budget 53 - 70

12.2 2016/17 CA & Partner Capital Programmes 71 - 130

13 Sheffield City Region Infrastructure Plan 131 - 136

14 Proposed Refresh of the Sheffield City Region Strategic Economic Plan 137 - 140

15 Social Inclusion Framework 141 - 156

16 Sustainable Travel Transition Year Funding Bid 157 - 160

17 Summary Report - Business Growth Executive Board 161 - 162

18 Summary Report - Housing Executive Board 163 - 164

19 Summary Report - Skills, Employment and Education Executive Board 165 - 166

20 Summary Report - Transport Executive Board 167 - 204

21 Summary Report - Infrastructure Executive Board 205 - 206

SHEFFIELD CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY

THE AMP TECHNOLOGY CENTRE, WAVERLEY, ROTHERHAM, S60 5WG

MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 1 FEBRUARY 2016

PRESENT:

Councillor John Burrows, Chesterfield BC (in the Chair)

Councillor Graham Baxter MBE, North East Derbyshire DCCouncillor Chris Read, Rotherham MBCCouncillor Julie Dore, Sheffield CCCouncillor Simon Greaves, Bassetlaw DCMayor Ros Jones, Doncaster MBCCouncillor Jim Andrews BEM, Barnsley MBCCouncillor John Ritchie, Bolsover District Council

Ruth Adams, SCR Executive TeamDavid Armiger, Bassetlaw District CouncilFiona Boden, SCR Executive TeamHuw Bowen, Chesterfield BCDorcas Bunton, Derbyshire Dales DCPeter Dale, Doncaster MBCSteve Edwards, SYPTEAndrew Gates, SCR Executive TeamJulie Hurley, SCR Executive TeamSharon Kemp, Rotherham MBCJulie Kenny CBE, Rotherham MBCJohn Mothersole, Sheffield CCMartin McCarthy, Deputy Monitoring OfficerKate Platts, SYPTEAndrew Shirt, Joint Authorities Governance UnitBen Still, SCR Executive TeamDaniel Swaine, Bolsover DC / NE Derbyshire DCEugene Walker, S.151 Officer

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor S Houghton CBE, Councillor A Syrett, Councillor A Rhodes, Councillor L Rose, A Frosdick, J Miller, N Taylor, D Terris and C Tyler

SCR Combined Authority1/02/16

1 APOLOGIES

Members’ apologies were noted as above.

2 ANNOUNCEMENTS

None requested.

3 URGENT ITEMS

None requested.

4 ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PUBLIC AND PRESS

None noted.

5 VOTING RIGHTS FOR NON-CONSTITUENT MEMBERS

It was confirmed that voting rights could not be conferred in respect of agenda item 13 as the requirement to set the South Yorkshire Transport Levy was a matter for South Yorkshire Local Authorities only.

6 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST BY INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS IN RELATION TO ANY ITEM OF BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA

None noted.

7 REPORTS FROM AND QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS

None noted.

8 RECEIPT OF PETITIONS

None received.

9 PUBLIC QUESTIONS

The Chair welcomed members of the public present and agreed to receive questions relating to the 2016/17 budget setting process (referenced at item 13: ‘Combined Authority Transport Levy and SYPTE Budget 2016/17’.

All Members of the CA acknowledged that they had received and read the questions submitted.

Tony Nuttall, Barnsley Retirees Action Group (affiliated to National Pensioners Convention) asked:

“What impact does this committee think that the change of rail franchise referred to have on the rail concessions for elderly and disabled pass holders?”


“There has been reference to the Rail Administration Grant received from DfT to: ‘secure, monitor, advertise and carry out administrative tasks connected with the provision of railway passenger services’. There has also been reference to “The DfT Rail North Partnership agreeing to provide this grant (approx. £1.2m) to SYPTE for 2016/17.”

And

“Does this cover the cost of continuing the rail concessions for elderly and disabled pass holders when Arriva Rail North takes over the franchise? Is it possible to extend that concession for the elderly so that half price travel is available into West Yorkshire again?”

“There has been information that the concessionary fare budget is estimated to underspend by 6% or £2million do councillors agree that the half price travel on trains into West Yorkshire or even the previous situation of free train travel for the elderly is quite easily attainable given that the budget for April 2014 said that the cost of free train travel in both South and West Yorkshire for elderly and disabled pass holders would have been just over £300,000 and there is obviously a cost for the present arrangement?”

The Chair responded:

Dear Mr Nuttall

Thank you for your question in relation to concessionary rail travel and matters relating to the rail administration grant and the change in rail franchise.

Rail Franchise

As you are aware, the Government has announced that it intends to award the Northern Franchise to Arriva Rail North Ltd and the TransPennine Express Franchise to First TransPennine Express Ltd. The rail concessions that currently exist in South Yorkshire will continue post April, when the franchises commence. These two new franchises will bring with them a circa £1.2 billion boost to rail services in and around the Sheffield City Region.

Rail Administration Grant

The Rail Administration Grant received from DFT does not fund rail concessions for the elderly and disabled. The provision of this fund will therefore not impact or fund the concessions provided in South Yorkshire during 2016/17.

Concessionary Rail Travel

The annual funding levy for public transport services in South Yorkshire has reduced by £29m (29%) over the last five years and it is essential that SYPTE’s reserves are used in a sustainable way to balance local transport needs with the pressure to reduce overall expenditure. Any underspend to the concessionary budget in this financial year can therefore not be used as suggested to fund either half price or free train travel into West Yorkshire as it would contravene the SCR


Combined Authority/SYPTE’s obligation to set a sustainable multi-year budget. This money will be used to support an ongoing reduction in the transport levy.

The changes to the discretionary senior concessions that SYPTE provides were necessary in order to achieve a 10% budget reduction in the 2014/15 budget.

I hope this answers your questions.

Alan Trickett from South Yorkshire Freedom Riders asked:

“As the financial report shows that the total SYPTE budget is likely to be underspent for the year by 3% and the budget for concessions will be underspent by 6% does the committee agree that it is possible to return to the situation that elderly bus pass holders in South Yorkshire could have the previous concession of using their passes from 9am restored”?

“This is of great concern to a number of us in different areas where bus travel is restricted because bus services are not very frequent. Some elderly people are not able to access a bus from their area until well into the morning whereas previously they could use a bus that runs between 9 and 9.30am.”


Dear Mr Trickett

Thank you for your question regarding elderly concessionary fares.

I can advise that changes to concessionary travel arrangements passed by Sheffield City Region’s Transport Committee in 2014 are not able to be reversed. The changes to the discretionary senior concessions that SYPTE provides were necessary in order to achieve a 10% budget reduction in the 2014/15 budget.

The annual funding levy for public transport services in South Yorkshire has reduced by £29m (29%) over the last five years and it is essential that SYPTE’s reserves are used in a sustainable way to balance local transport needs with the pressure to reduce overall expenditure.

Any underspend to the concessionary budget in this financial year can, therefore, not be used as suggested as it would contravene the SCR Combined Authority/SYPTE’s obligation to set a sustainable multi-year budget. This money will be used to support an ongoing reduction in the transport levy.

I appreciate that the budget paper presented at Transport Committee in January shows an underspend but the process for reimbursing public transport operators for the revenue they forgo by charging concessionary fares is complex and follows principles laid down by Parliament. Variations in these payments depend on the number of journeys made and changes in the fares charged by operators. SYPTE needs to make assumptions about these changes when it sets its budget. It is only when SYPTE has received claims from operators for the whole year that we know for sure how much we need to pay. Following recent improvements in how SYPTE


models its concessionary budget we would not expect to see an underspend in future years.

I hope this answers your question.

Sharron Milsom, Sheffield Freedom Riders asked:

“The changes made to Sheffield buses, including a 10% cut in the bus network, have resulted in chaos in the city and continuing difficulties for passengers, including disabled people and pensioners. A consultation has now been done in Doncaster for changes to bus services. What percentage cut do the Doncaster proposals represent? And what percentage is anticipated for Barnsley and Rotherham?”

“The Sheffield consultation has been accepted as being inadequate. What specific improvements have been/are being included in the consultations in other parts of South Yorkshire? In particular, have any improvements been made as regards consulting with disabled people and pensioners?”

“The budget for 2016/17 includes a saving of £1,750,000 for ‘Demand Reductions.’ Does this include any provision for expected reductions in demand resulting from the cuts to the network?”


Dear Ms Milsom

Thank you for your question regarding the Bus Partnership Network Consultations.

The Doncaster Bus Partnership consultation closed just before Christmas and the analysis and network design is still ongoing. The launch of Barnsley Bus Partnership is planned for later this year. Recommendations from both these projects will be presented in due course. The Rotherham Bus Partnership was launched in July 2014. I can advise that there are no plans to formally undertake any future consultation regarding the Sheffield Bus Network, however Sheffield Bus Partnership is working together to make positive service changes to the network and it is encouraging to see that punctuality has improved.

Using feedback from passengers and journey data recorded on-board, we have identified specific problems, altered timetables and introduced extra buses where needed as a direct result. We expect these further timetable adjustments to better co-ordinate more journeys and, together with the changes already made, improve service delivery across the network overall.

With regards to the consultations undertaken, it is worth noting that without the voluntary bus partnership model operators are under no obligation to consult regarding service changes.


As advised at the SCR Transport Committee, the bus partnership model continues to be reviewed and improved through lessons learnt. A number of these lessons have already been implemented in the recent Doncaster Bus Partnership consultation with an increase in the consultation period from four weeks to six.

In relation to improvements to consult with pensioners and disabled people, there is already a lot of targeted work that happens. All groups are sent paper copies and offered assistance with taking part. All materials offer people the opportunity to ring Traveline in order to receive assistance and this offer has been taken up on many occasions. In response to customer feedback following the Sheffield consultation in Doncaster, we increased the paper copies and posters available in local libraries and increased posters and maps on display in the Interchange.

The savings of £1,750,000 for ‘Demand Reductions’ that you refer to reflects the continuing trend of falling demand for existing concessionary payments. This reduction is reflected in next year’s budget.


George Arthur from Barnsley NUT retired members section asked:

“Given that there have been great inadequacies with the last consultations that have been carried out about transport arrangements in South Yorkshire, will this Combined Authority undertake to make sure that any future changes to concessions and transport arrangements are organised in a way that allows the largest number of people to know what is being proposed and to consult in a meaningful way? To illustrate past problems: consultations have not been broadcast in Barnsley’s main newspaper, the Barnsley Chronicle, until the Freedom Riders issued a press release; consultations at interchanges were initially organised at a time when elderly bus pass holders could not arrive using their passes until the Freedom Riders asked for these times to be extended; large posters were not put up in interchanges advertising the consultation; the last consultation asked people to decide which group deserved priority out of elderly, disabled and young; other questions also tried to force people to decide on cuts rather than really consulting with people; no public meetings were organised to which people could come and discuss properly what was wanted”.

“Given the large budget underspend by the SYPTE for the second year running will this Combined Authority instruct officials to draw up a new proposal that will allow concessions enjoyed by the elderly up until March 31st 2014 to be restored?”


Dear Mr Arthur

Thank you for your question regarding consultations and concessionary travel arrangements.


Consultation

We do recognise that any consultation has its limitations, but in this case SYPTE believes that the consultation exercise undertaken was appropriate in the circumstances.

This year we did advertise in the Metro and issued several media releases alongside stakeholder engagement, drop in events and posters in interchanges. This attracted a response from 2437 people across South Yorkshire.

Concessionary Travel

The changes to the discretionary senior concessions that SYPTE provides were necessary in order to achieve a 10% budget reduction in the 2014/15 budget.

The annual funding levy for public transport support services in South Yorkshire has reduced by £29m (29%) over the last five years and it is essential that SYPTE’s reserves are used in a sustainable way to balance local transport needs with the pressure to reduce overall expenditure.


The Chair invited members of the public to respond to the points raised in the representations.

It was confirmed that full responses would be provided in writing.

The Chair thanked the members of the public for attending and for their representations.

RESOLVED – That Combined Authority Members instruct the PTE Executive Director to respond in writing to the questions posed at the meeting.

10 MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 7TH DECEMBER 2015

R Adams referred to Minute 19 ‘Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board,’ informing Members that confirmation regarding the Board’s membership had been requested and was currently awaited.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting of the Combined Authority held on 7th December 2015 were agreed to be an accurate record of the meeting.

11 DEVOLUTION - CONSULTATION UPDATE

Members were presented with a summary of the headline findings from feedback received on the Sheffield City Region’s proposed Devolution Deal.

A total of 244 consultation responses had been received from residents and businesses within the Sheffield City Region, which had broadly supported the proposed Devolution Deal.


It was noted that a paper would be circulated to Members shortly, setting out further details of all the feedback received.

RESOLVED – That the Combined Authority Members noted the presentation.

12 DEVOLUTION UPDATE

A paper was received to provide Members with a summary on the progress made in taking forward the Sheffield City Region’s (SCR’s) proposed Devolution Deal in December and January.

A summary of key progress on the workstream themes was set out in the paper along with current issues which had been identified regarding consultation and governance.

The paper identified the next steps to take forward the proposed Deal including the indicative timetable for its ratification.

RESOLVED – That the Combined Authority Members note the work undertaken to date and proposed next steps.

13 COMBINED AUTHORITY TRANSPORT LEVY AND SYPTE BUDGET

A paper was presented to Members regarding the South Yorkshire districts’ requirement to agree a transport levy for 2016/17, with this levy funding the transport activities of the Combined Authority principally through resourcing the grant paid to South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE).

To meet statutory requirements, the levy would need to be approved at the 2nd February CA leaders’ meeting.

It was noted that reflecting resource pressures across local government, the South Yorkshire Local Authorities had asked Combined Authority finance officers and SYPTE to draw up proposals to reduce the levy by 10% on the 2015/16 figure.

The report therefore presented a mixture of policy choices, efficiency savings and special capital financing measures to reach a 10% reduced levy of £60.5m for 2016/17.

Mayor Jones referred to one of the policy change proposals to increase the child concessionary fare from 70p to 80p, asking if further details could be provided regarding the proposal to introduce SMART enabled value for money commercial travel products for young people.

S Edwards reported that SYPTE was currently working with TravelMaster to launch a weekly multi-operator value for money SMART enabled commercial travel product, designed to help minimise the impact of the fare increase on young people and their families. It was highlighted that this product would offer better value for money, rather than purchasing individual single fare tickets for a significant number of children. Additionally, a range of single operator value for money tickets were also readily available.


RESOLVED – That the Combined Authority Members:-

i) Agreed the proposed Combined Authority Transport levy be set at £60.5m for 2016/17;

ii) Noted that this levy was supported by £7.4m of reserves, representing 53% of all the savings required to achieve the 10% reduction; and

iii) Noted that the proposed levy was contingent on the implementation of the policy choices referred to in the paper, including a 10p increase on Child Concessionary Fares.

14 CA/LEP REVENUE BUDGET PROPOSALS

A paper was presented providing CA Members with an overview of the current shape of the CA/LEP revenue budget proposals for 2016/17, without taking account of a potential Devolution Deal. Further budget proposals were being considered separately to enable officers to produce a budget should a Devolution Deal be reached.

Members noted that the budget proposals outlined in the paper would resource each of the Executive Board’s Business Plans. Resource pressures associated with delivery of the capital and revenue programmes and the development of the SEP had also been identified, noting that these pressures had been partly off-set by forecast increased income, albeit not completely.

Members were advised that currently, proposals suggested that subscriptions would need to rise by £1.3m to resource activity. £1m of this related to the adoption of the Transport Hub previously paid for through the South Yorkshire transport levy. The transfer reduced the cost of SYPTE to South Yorkshire partners, resulting in a net-nil cost overall for those authorities, apart from the North Midlands partners.

It was noted that CA Finance officers were working with the SCR Executive to identify mitigations that would allow them to proceed to budget without raising subscriptions overall.

A composite revenue budget and capital programme would be presented to Leaders in March, alongside the CA’s Business Plans to show how the Financial Plan would support the delivery of the SEP.

RESOLVED – That Combined Authority Members:-

i) Noted that the budget proposals did not include Devolution funded activity;

ii) Noted that current proposals would require £1.3m of additional resource, £1m of which related to costs previously funded by the South Yorkshire transport levy;

iii) Noted that the CA was committed to finding ways to mitigate calls on partners for increased subscriptions; and


iv) Noted that a more thorough report linked to the Capital Programme and Business Plans would be presented for approval on the 14th March.

15 QUARTER 3 REVENUE AND CAPITAL PROGRAMME MONITORING

A paper was presented setting out the CA’s revenue budgets and capital programmes at the end of Quarter 3 of financial year 2015/16.

At Quarter 3 the CA/LEP budget was forecast to underspend by £303k up by £146k on the previous quarter. It was noted that this was primarily due to delayed recruitment into roles associated with the delivery of revenue programmes. This underspend was against a target underspend of £116k, required to build up a revenue reserve for the CA/LEP.

Members were informed that the South Yorkshire Transport budget remained on course to underspend by circa £400k, principally due to better than anticipated investment income generated.

At Quarter 3 capital expenditure on the CA’s directly controlled schemes remained low at £1.4m from a budget of £39m. CA Finance officers remained in dialogue with Government with regards to the forecast capital underspend.

The paper also asked Members to support a recommendation to vire £225k of funding from STEP to SCRIF to support better oversight of the SCC Grey-to-Green scheme previously funded by both funding streams.

Members asked if future budget reports could be simplified to aid Members’ understanding. E Walker acknowledged Members’ request.


i) Noted the forecast underspend of c. £303k on the CA/LEP budget;

ii) Noted the forecast underspend of c. £400k on the South Yorkshire Transport budget;

iii) Noted the continued slow pace of expenditure on the capital programme; and

iv) Approved the virement of £225k from the STEP funding stream to SCRIF.

16 FINANCIAL REGULATIONS

A paper was presented proposing changes to the CA’s authorisation of expenditure approval matrix to reflect the new SCR Director and Head of Service hierarchies. Expenditure up to a value of £250k would fall to be approved by Heads of Service and/or Directors who lead on each work stream.

Members were made aware that the matrix related to approving payments on the CA’s financial system, rather than more fundamental decisions on expenditure taken by Leaders and the proper officers.


It was noted that the proposed move would reduce reliance on the Head of Paid Service and Director of Finance to approve expenditure and better align expenditure decisions to those individuals who hold direct budget responsibility.

RESOLVED – That Combined Authority Members endorse the Director of Finance’s proposed changes to the CA’s Financial Regulations authorisation of expenditure matrix for transactional processing within the financial system.

17 SUMMARY REPORT - BUSINESS GROWTH EXECUTIVE BOARD

The Summary report from the SCR Business Growth Executive Board was received.

The resolutions made by the Board were duly noted and agreed by the CA.

18 SUMMARY REPORT - HOUSING EXECUTIVE BOARD

The Summary report from the SCR Housing Executive Board was received.


19 PROPOSITION FOR HOUSING FUND UPDATE

A Summary report around the development of a Housing Capital Programme was received from the SCR Housing Executive Board.


20 SUMMARY REPORT - SKILLS, EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATION EXECUTIVE BOARD

The Summary report from the SCR Skills, Employment and Education Executive Board was received.


21 SUMMARY REPORT - TRANSPORT EXECUTIVE BOARD

The Summary report from the SCR Transport Executive Board was received.


22 RAIL NORTH UPDATE

Members noted that the Department for Transport had announced that Arriva had been awarded the Northern franchise from April 2016 until March 2025. Arriva had announced that it would remove old Pacer trains by the end of 2019 with new carriages.


Members felt that it was important for the Combined Authority to write to Government expressing its concerns that the new carriages were to be built in Europe and not in the UK.

On a separate issue, Members commented that the Combined Authority should also write to Government with an alternative arrangement regarding the Government’s plans to close the Department for Business Innovation and Skills office in Sheffield by 2018.


i) Noted the verbal update;

ii) Agreed that the CA writes to Government expressing its concerns regarding new carriages being built in Europe and not in the UK; and

iii) Agreed that the CA writes to Government offering an alternative arrangement regarding its plans to close the Department for Business Innovation and Skills office in Sheffield by 2018.

23 TRANSPORT FOR THE NORTH UPDATE

A paper was received to provide an update to the Combined Authority on the progress of the Transport for the North (TfN) project.

Members noted that amendments to the ‘Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill’ would establish TfN as a statutory body by March 2017. The Autumn Statement confirmed that TfN would receive £50 million over five years to develop the organisation and build an investment programme.

TfN consists of 9 interdependent workstreams, covering specific modes and areas of activity. The SCR has representation on all of the workstreams, ensuring that the SCR’s interests are communicated to inform the development of each workstream output.

The SCR position/ask for each workstream was outlined in the paper for Members’ information.


i) Noted the progress being made on TfN; and

ii) Noted the aspiration of the Sheffield City Region for each workstream.

24 SUMMARY REPORT - INFRASTRUCTURE EXECUTIVE BOARD

The Summary report from the SCR Infrastructure Executive Board was received.


CHAIR

1. Issue

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek Combined Authority ratification of the Sheffield

City Region “SCR” Devolution Agreement (“the in-principle deal”). To provide an

update to the Combined Authority regarding: local council ratification; progress on

and securing important improvements to the in-principle deal; a summary of the

public consultation findings and detail on the potential changes to the Combined

Authority geography as a result of clauses within the Cities and Local Government

Act 2016.

2. Recommendations

2.1 It is recommended that the Combined Authority:

a) Note the progress that has been made since the proposal was made in

October 2016 – in particular those matters detailed in section 4 relating to

geography, the relationship between any future mayor and the Combined

Authority and future constitutional changes.

b) Note and take into account that an online consultation exercise took place

from the 2nd December to the 15th January– including the summary of this

consultation detailed in section 5.

Summary

This paper seeks Combined Authority ratification of the Sheffield City Region “SCR”

Devolution Agreement (“the in-principle deal”). It provides an update to the Combined

Authority regarding: local council ratification; progress made regarding the in-principle

deal; a summary of the public consultation process and detail on the potential

changes to the Combined Authority geography as a result of clauses within the Cities

and Local Government Act 2016.

14th March 2016

Combined Authority ratification of the Sheffield City Region Devolution Agreement

c) Note that at a Full Council meeting on 3 March 2016, Chesterfield Borough

Council agreed to ratify the deal and take steps to become a constituent

member of the SCR. Note that other areas of the SCR are considering taking

a similar course in the future.

d) Endorse the devolution agreement set out at Appendix A and consent to a

future ‘enabling order’ being laid which provides that a mayoral election will

take place in May 2017.

3. Introduction

3.1 On 2 October 2015, Sheffield City Region (“SCR”) political and business leaders

secured an in-principle Devolution Agreement with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The in-principle deal involves the significant devolution of power and funding from

Whitehall to local leaders in the City Region including £900m of additional funding

which would, if the deal is ratified, be made available from April 2016.

3.2 Whilst the Combined Authority may choose to ratify the deal it remains the case that

full approval has not been achieved until all constituent members of the

Combined Authority have ratified locally. Non-constituent members of the

Combined Authority are not required to have ratified locally for the deal to be

approved but each non-constituent member has either approved or is in the process

of securing support for the deal within their respective area.

3.3 Ratification of the deal is a separate issue from the membership status of non-

constituent members of the CA, although some areas are considering these issues

concurrently.

3.4 The Proposal covers a range of themes including skills and employment; housing,

planning and public assets; innovation, advanced manufacturing and business

growth and transport. The deal also includes elements of fiscal devolution (retained

business rates) and changes to City Region-level democratic structures.

Specifically, the proposal makes clear that any ‘deal’ is contingent upon:

3.5 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority [adopting the] model of a directly

elected city region Mayor over the Combined Authority’s area with the first elections

in May 2017. The existing Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will also be

strengthened with additional powers.i

3.6 The terms of the deal require formal ratification by the SCR Combined Authority

(“CA”) by the end of March 2016. The in-principle deal was also clear that formal

approval was subject to constituent members of the SCR CA providing formal

ratification of the deal at local authority-level. To inform these decisions, a

consultation exercise was undertaken. A summary of this consultation exercise is

included at paragraphs 5.1 to 5.4 below.

4. Work undertaken since the deal was signed

4.1 Since signing the Proposal, a body of work has been undertaken to take forward the

different elements and commitments within this document. There are four key areas

where progress has been made:

Geography;

the relationship between any future mayor and the Combined Authority;

the ability of the SCR to determine future constitutional changes;

progress on the policy content of the deal.

Geography

4.2 The Cities and Local Government Act received Royal Assent in January 2016. The

Act provides greater flexibility to combined authorities and greater autonomy to

lower-tier councils, enabling combined authorities to better reflect their functional

economic areas. From a SCR-perspective, these changes will provide greater

autonomy for non-constituent councils.

4.3 At a Full Council meeting on 3 March 2016, Chesterfield Borough Council agreed to

ratify the deal and take steps to become a constituent member of the SCR. Other

areas of the SCR are considering taking a similar course in the future. It is expected

that all non-constituent members of the CA will have indicated their intention as to

CA membership status by the end of March.

4.4 These changes will enable a far closer alignment between the CA and the LEP

“functional economic area” – which evidence suggests will be beneficial to the

economic performance of all concerned.

The relationship between the CA and any future mayor

4.5 Concerns were raised by the CA that the in-principle deal included the potential for

the Mayor to be able to exercise a veto over all Combined Authority decisions.

Clarification was sought from Ministers. The Combined Authority received

assurance that the decision-making process between the Mayor and the Combined

Authority could, and should be resolved through the Mayoral Combined Authorities

own constitution.

4.6 A draft ‘Scheme’ document detailing these constitutional changes will be prepared

over the coming months. This will inform a future order to be prepared by autumn

2016. Accordingly, the SCR must consent, consult upon and formally ratify any

future constitutional changes over the coming months

The ability of the SCR to determine future constitutional changes

4.7 Accordingly, and as detailed above, each council must formally consent to any

future changes to the constitution of the CA. This will be achieved through member

councils of the CA giving their consent to draft orders prior to these being laid in

Parliament.

Progress on the policy content of the deal

4.8 Key elements of this progress are summarised below, with additional detail included

in the table at Appendix B. Included within this is progress made by City Region

partners and Government:

Overview - Funding confirmation: subject to the ratification of the Proposal, the

SCR will receive its first £30m ‘gain-share’ payment in April 2016. Furthermore,

through the Spending Review the SCR has received indicative confirmation of its

£310m Growth Deal award between 2016 and 2021.

Governance - legislation: the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016

(“the 2016 Act”) received Royal Assent on 28 February 2016. The 2016 act

provides significant additional flexibility, particularly for the five district councils of

the SCR.

Skills - Area Based Review: work on the Review has progressed and this is

expected to be complete in April.

Employment - DWP: this area of the proposed Deal is where the City Region

currently has the greatest concerns in terms of implementation. This issue is

being escalated with HM Government.

Housing Investment Fund: the SCR is entering into further discussions on the

development of a fund. However, it should be noted that the SCR will not receive

additional devolved powers and funding until it has ratified the current proposed

Devolution Deal.

Devolved and consolidated transport budget: given the confirmation of

funding available nationally for transport through the Spending Review it is

expected that the SCR will negotiate and agree its budget in February 2016.

Buses Bill: it is expected that the Draft Bill will be published by Government in

later in the year and receive Royal Assent in early 2017. This Bill will establish

the primary legislation required to re-franchise bus services and make provisions

to strengthen partnership working.

Business rates: SCR and Government currently agreeing a baseline against

which additional growth will be calculated. It is expected that up to £19m of

additional income (in 2016/17) will be secured by SCR councils as a result of the

retention of business rate growth. It is expected that these arrangements will be

in place from April 2016, enabling the City Region to share the benefits of the

additional growth it creates.

Intermediate Body status for ESIF: discussions have progressed and it is

expected that the SCR will be able to make a decision in March 2016 on if it

wishes to become an Intermediate Body for the selection of ESIF Projects and

create an ESIF Executive Board.

5. The consultation process

5.1 The SCR has been consulting on the Proposal since it was made. This has

included:

consultation through the local media – including interviews on BBC ‘Look North’

and articles in both the Start and the Yorkshire Post;

consultation with the business community through the LEP and through a

Chamber Business Insider Event in December 2015 (with around 150 business

representatives in attendance);

consultation thought social media (including Twitter);

attendance at formal council Overview and Scrutiny meeting e.g. in Doncaster on

12 January 2016;

a formal online consultation exercise and survey see:

www.sheffieldcityregiondevolution.org.uk;

other local consultation

5.2 A detailed report is included at Appendix C which sets out further details of the

consultation process undertaken and the main issues identified. The key trends and

perspectives from the responses were:

Positive support throughout for principle of stronger local control of decision-

making

Recognition of the impact that specific policy areas could have on SCR and the

local economy

Negative perceptions of the need for an elected mayor – mainly due to creation of

additional bureaucracy; complexity with existing arrangements; outcome of 2012

city mayor referenda

Real need for clarity about the geographical scope of the mayoral arrangement

and powers, particularly for East Midlands districts

Positive about potential for more devolution, particularly once the current set of

proposals have been implemented. Suggestions are ambitious and radical

including tax raising powers, all skills, public transport, education and health.

6. Local council ratification

6.1 At the time of producing this report Barnsley, Rotherham and Doncaster

Metropolitan Borough Councils have fully ratified the in-principle devolution deal

with further support for the deal provided by the non-constituent members in

Chesterfield Borough Council, Bolsover District Council, North East Derbyshire

District Council and Derbyshire Dales District Council.

7. Proposal and justification

http://www.sheffieldcityregiondevolution.org.uk/

7.1 On the basis of this consultation, the progress made on the issues of geography,

the relationship between any future mayor and the Combined Authority and future

constitutional changes it is recommended that the Combined Authority formally

ratify the devolution Proposal set out at Appendix A and consent to an

enabling order being laid which provides for a Mayoral election in May 2017.

7.2 The justification for this recommendation is that we believe the proposal will support

the City Region to:

improve transport and join up our transport connections with other parts of the

country;

deliver major regeneration schemes and secure more private sector investment;

help more of our businesses export their goods and services and promote our

region around the world;

deliver significant improvements to the skills and training system;

design and deliver a Careers Service to get young people and adults the

information they need;

deliver the UK’s first Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District and National

Institute for Infrastructure;

deliver 100% ultrafast broadband coverage for all of the Sheffield City Region;

boost and expand our successful Enterprise Zones;

control of the powers and resources for the bus network and develop an ‘Oyster

card’ type system for public transport.

7.3 In summary, the proposal will place more powers (and funds) in the hands of local

leaders:

giving them more tools with which to develop our economy;

create sustainable high-quality employment and;

fund public services in the future.

8. Next steps

8.1 If the Proposal is ratified by all relevant local authorities and the Combined Authority

– the key milestones between now and any election in May 2017 would be as

follows. It should be noted that there may be some minor changes to these

timescales over the coming months.

When What

< March 2016 Agreement ratified by each LA plus the CA

Each area must ‘consent’ to the enabling order

(see below)

01 March 2016 Begin drafting MCA ‘Scheme’ document

‘Early April’ 2016 Enabling order (to provide for election May 17)

agreed between SCR and CLG

‘early’ May 2016 Individual LAs consent to the MCA Scheme /

specific changes to the SCR constitution

contained within – subject to consultation.

31 May 2016 END – Scheme drafting and negotiations

20 June 2016 CA - approval of draft Scheme – for

consultation.

25 June 2016 START – statutory consultation period.

29 July 2016 END – statutory consultation period.

August 2016 Special CA formal approval of scheme – post

consultation.

01 September 2016 SCR submits:

Final Scheme and summary of consultation to

CLG.

‘Mid’ October 2016 Formal consent to order(s) detailing

constitutional changes

31 December 2016 Completion of parliamentary process

May 2017 Election of mayor

9. Financial implications

9.1 There are no direct financial implications from this report: there is no net ‘cost’

associated with the ratification of this proposal. The costs of, for example, any future

Mayoral election would be met from future devolved funds.

9.2 However, the constitutional arrangements of any MCA (including revenue raising

powers and the use of retained business rates) will have a significant impact on

both the finances of the CA and of its Members.

10. Legal implications

10.1 There are no direct legal implications of this paper. However, the MCA would

reflect a considerable constitutional change to the CA and its members. As above,

these changes will be subject to consultation with and the consent of members of

the CA.

11. Diversity implications

11.1 There are no direct diversity implications arising from this report.

12. List of appendices

12.1 Appendix A - Sheffield City Region Proposed Devolution Deal Agreement.

12.2 Appendix B – Summary of progress made since the proposed Deal was signed in

October.

12.3 Appendix C – Summary of Consultation.

REPORT AUTHOR: Andy Gates POST Head of Policy, SCR Executive Team Officer responsible: Dave Smith, Executive Director SCR Executive Team [email protected]

i http://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/SCR-Devolution-Agreement-2015.pdf at p. 5.

http://www.sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/SCR-Devolution-Agreement-2015.pdf

http://sheffieldcityregion.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/SCR-Devolution-Agreement-2015.pdf

1

SHEFFIELD CITY

REGION DEVOLUTION

AGREEMENT

2

3

4

Contents Overview page 5 Summary table page 6 Governance page 7 Skills (19+) page 8 Skills (16-18) page 9 Employment page 10 Housing and planning page 11 Transport page 12 Trade and investment page 13 Innovation page 14 Business growth and support page 14 Fiscal page 15 Geography page 16 Sheffield City Region Combined Authority commitments page 16

5

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority Devolution Deal

This document sets out the terms of a proposed agreement between Government and

the leaders of the Sheffield City Region to devolve a range of powers and responsibilities

to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority and a new directly elected mayor.

Building on the City Deal, agreed in 2012, the Growth Deals, agreed in July 2014 and

January 2015 and initial Devolution Agreement, agreed in December 2014, this

Devolution Deal marks the next step in the transfer of resources and powers from

central Government to the Sheffield City Region.

The devolution proposal and all levels of funding are subject to the Spending Review

and Sheffield City Region consulting on the proposals and ratification from the local

authorities. This agreement is subject to the enactment of the necessary legislation (The

Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill and the Buses Bill), and to parliamentary

approval of the secondary legislation implementing the provisions of this agreement.

This agreement will enable Sheffield City Region to accelerate the delivery of its Strategic

Economic Plan, strengthening its position as a world class centre for advanced

manufacturing and engineering.

6

Summary of the proposed Devolution Deal agreed by the Government and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority with the support of the Local Enterprise Partnership

A new, directly elected Sheffield City Region Mayor will act as Chair to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority and will exercise the following powers and functions devolved from central Government:

Responsibility for a consolidated, devolved transport budget, with a multi-year settlement to be agreed at the Spending Review.

Responsibility for franchised bus services, which will support the Combined Authority’s delivery of smart and integrated ticketing across the Combined Authority’s constituent councils.

Responsibility for an identified Key Route Network of local authority roads that will be collaboratively managed and maintained at the city region level by the Combined Authority on behalf of the Mayor.

Powers over strategic planning, including the responsibility to create a spatial framework for the city region and to chair the Sheffield City Region Joint Assets Board.

The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority (SCR CA), working with the Mayor, will receive the following powers:

Control of a new additional £30 million a year funding allocation over 30 years, to be invested to boost growth.

Responsibility for chairing an area-based review of 16+ skills provision, the outcomes of which will be taken forward in line with the principles of the devolved arrangements, and devolved 19+ adult skills funding from 2018/19.

Joint responsibility with Government to co-design employment support for the harder-to-help claimants, many of whom are currently referred to the Work Programme and Work Choice. SCR will also bring forward a proposal to pilot more intensive support for those furthest from the labour market.

More effective joint working with UKTI to boost trade and investment, and responsibility to work with Government to develop and implement a devolved approach to the delivery of national business support programmes from 2017.

In addition:

To support the development of the SCR Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District, the Government will offer the Sheffield City Region expert advice and support to ensure they are able to put forward a City Region led proposal to undertake a Science and Innovation audit.

The Sheffield City Region will work with HM Government to achieve their ambitions for a national Institute for Infrastructure within Doncaster.

HM Government will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to agree specific funding flexibilities to a Spending Review timetable. The joint ambition will be to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority a single pot to invest in its economic growth.

Further powers may be agreed over time and included in future legislation.

7

Governance

1. Sheffield City Region (SCR) has taken bold steps in securing effective and accountable governance arrangements. The SCR Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) was part of the first wave of LEPs established in 2010 and has been one of the strongest performers since then. The SCR was the first to submit plans for its Combined Authority under the Coalition Government, which was established in April 2014. The Combined Authority enables decisions on economic growth and development to be taken in an open and transparent way in one place for the whole of the SCR.

2. As part of this proposed agreement, the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will adopt a model of a directly elected city region Mayor over the Combined Authority’s area with the first elections in May 20171. The existing Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will also be strengthened with additional powers. This takes the next step in transferring resources and powers from central Government to the Sheffield City Region. There is no intention to take existing powers from local authorities without agreement. The agreement will protect the integrity of local authorities in the Sheffield City Region.

3. The directly elected Mayor for Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will autonomously exercise new powers. The Mayor will chair the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority, the members of which will serve as the Mayor’s Cabinet. The Mayor and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be scrutinised and held to account by the SCR Overview and Scrutiny committee(s). The SCR Mayor will also be required to consult the SCR CA Cabinet on his/her strategies, which it may reject if two-thirds of the members agree to do so. The SCR Cabinet will also examine the Mayor’s spending plans and will be able to amend his/her plans, if two-thirds of the members who have been appointed by constituent councils agree to do so.

4. Proposals for decision by the Combined Authority may be put forward by the Mayor or any Cabinet Member. The Mayor will have one vote as will other voting members. Any questions that are to be decided by the Combined Authority are to be decided by a majority of the members present and voting, subject to that majority including the vote of the Mayor, unless otherwise set out in legislation, or specifically delegated through the Authority's Constitution.

5. The Sheffield City Region Mayor and the other members of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be required to work closely together. Specifically:

a. the Mayor will provide overall leadership and chair Combined Authority meetings; and

b. the SCR Cabinet Model, where the leaders have a clear portfolio of responsibilities, will act as a supporting and advisory function to the Mayor and Combined Authority in respective policy areas.

1 This will be based on the constituent members of the Combined Authority but can be extended to include any other members of the Combined Authority that change their member status from non-constituent to constituent.

8

c. The Mayor will also be a member of the LEP, alongside the other members of the Combined Authority, recognising the importance of the private sector in any growth strategies or delivery.

6. The recent changes to strengthen the governance arrangements in the Sheffield City Region by formally establishing five Executive Boards that have delegated decision making powers from the Combined Authority, are expected to continue as part of this agreement.

7. Economic growth is a shared endeavour and is vital in delivering the Northern Powerhouse ambitions. The Mayoral Combined Authority will continue to work very closely with HM Government for the benefit of the public.

8. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership commits to work with partners across the North of England to promote opportunities for pan-Northern collaboration, including Transport for the North, to drive northern productivity and build the Northern Powerhouse.

Skills (19+)

9. The Government will enable local commissioning of outcomes to be achieved from the 19+ adult skills budget starting in academic year 2016/17; and will fully devolve budgets to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority from academic year 2018/19 (subject to readiness conditions). These arrangements do not cover apprenticeships.

10. Devolution will proceed in three stages, across the next three academic years:

a. Starting now, the SCR Combined Authority will begin to prepare for local commissioning. It will develop a series of outcome agreements with providers about what should be delivered in return for allocations in the 2016/17 academic year. This will replace the current system of funding by qualifications as providers will receive their total 19+ skills funding as a single block allocation. This new arrangement will allow the SCR Combined Authority to agree with providers the mix and balance of provision that will be delivered in return for the block funding, and to define how success will be assessed.

b. For the 2017/18 academic year, and following the area review, Government will work with the SCR Combined Authority to vary the block grant allocations made to providers, within an agreed framework

c. From 2018/19, there will be full devolution of funding. The SCR Combined Authority will be responsible for allocations to providers and the outcomes to be achieved, consistent with statutory entitlements. Government will not seek to second guess these decisions, but it will set proportionate requirements about outcome information to be collected in order to allow students to make informed choices. A funding formula for calculating the size of the

9

grant to local / combined authorities will need to take into account a range of demographic, educational and labour market factors.

11. The readiness conditions for full devolution are that:

a. Parliament has legislated to enable transfer to local authorities of the current statutory duties on the Secretary of State to secure appropriate facilities for further education for adults from this budget and for provision to be free in certain circumstances

b. Completion of the Area Review process leading to a sustainable provider base

c. After the area-reviews are complete, agreed arrangements are in place between central government and the Combined Authority to ensure that devolved funding decisions take account of the need to maintain a sustainable and financially viable 16+ provider base

d. Clear principles and arrangements have been agreed between central government and the Combined Authority for sharing financial risk and managing failure of 16+ providers, reflecting the balance of devolved and national interest and protecting the taxpayer from unnecessary expenditure and liabilities

e. Learner protection and minimum standards arrangements are agreed

f. Funding and provider management arrangements, including securing financial assurance, are agreed in a way that minimises costs and maximises consistency and transparency.

Skills (16-18)

12. HM Government commits to an Area Based Review of post-16 education and training leading to agreed recommendations by February 2016. The outcomes of the Area Based Review will be taken forward in line with the principles of the devolved arrangements. The review will be chaired by the Combined Authority and will include all post-16 education and training provision in the initial analysis phase. Recommendations will be focused on General FE and Sixth Form Colleges, however the Regional Schools Commissioner and the relevant local authorities will consider any specific issues arising from the reviews for school sixth form provision.

13. To ensure continued local collaboration following the Area Based Review, the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will work in partnership with local colleges and providers to publish a local skills strategy. This will aim to help ensure that post-16 providers are delivering the skills that local employers require. It is expected that the Combined Authority will then collaborate with colleges and providers, with appropriate support from EFA, to work towards that plan.

14. Following the Area Based Review, HM Government would expect the Regional Schools Commissioner to continue to engage with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to ensure local links and working are maintained.

10

15. HM Government will work with Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to ensure that local priorities are fed into the provision of careers advice, such that it is employer-led, integrated and meets local needs. In particular, the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will ensure that local priorities are fed into provision through direct involvement and collaboration with HMG in the design of careers and enterprise provision for all ages, including collaboration on the work of the Careers and Enterprise Company and the National Careers Service.

Employment

16. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will work with DWP to co-design the future employment support, from April 2017, for harder-to-help claimants, many of whom are currently referred to the Work Programme and Work Choice.

17. The respective roles of DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority in the co-design will include:

a. DWP sets the funding envelope, Sheffield City Region Combined Authority can top up if they wish to, but are not required to.

b. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will set out how they will join up local public services in order to improve outcomes for this group, particularly how they will work with the Clinical Commissioning Groups/third sector to enable timely health-based support.

c. DWP set the high-level performance framework and will ensure the support appropriately reflects labour market issues. The primary outcomes will be to reduce unemployment and move people into sustained employment. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will have some flexibility to determine specific local outcomes that reflect local labour market priorities, these outcomes should be complementary to the ultimate employment outcome (for example in-work wage progression). In determining the local outcome(s) Sheffield City Region Combined Authority should work with DWP to take account of the labour market evidence base and articulate how the additional outcome(s) will fit within the wider strategic and economic context and deliver value for money.

d. Before delivery commences, DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will set out an agreement covering the respective roles of each party in the delivery and monitoring of the support, including a mechanism by which each party can raise and resolve any concern that arise.

18. In addition, in the event employment support for this group is delivered through a contracted-out programme, Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will co-commission the programme with DWP. the respective roles of DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will include:

11

a. DWP sets the contracting arrangements, including contract package areas, but should consider any proposals from Sheffield City Region Combined Authority on contract package area geography.

b. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be involved in tender evaluation.

c. Providers will be solely accountable to DWP, but DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority’s above-mentioned agreement will include a mechanism by which Sheffield City Region Combined Authority can escalate to DWP any concerns about provider performance/breaching local agreements and require DWP to take formal contract action where appropriate.

19. In the event that alternative delivery mechanisms are put in place, comparable arrangements will be put in place.

20. Sheffield City Region will develop a business case for an innovative pilot to support those who are hardest to help. The business case should set out the evidence to support the proposed pilot, cost and benefits and robust evaluation plans, to enable the proposal to be taken forward as part of the delivery of this agreement, subject to Ministerial approval.

Housing and planning

21. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority Mayor will also exercise strategic planning powers to support and accelerate these ambitions. This will include the power to:

a. Create a spatial framework, which will act as the framework for managing planning across the Sheffield City Region, and with which all Local Development Plans will be in strategic alignment. The spatial framework will need to be approved by unanimous vote of the members appointed by constituent councils of the Mayoral Combined Authority. This approach must not delay any Local Development Plans, and will build upon the local plans being developed.

b. Create supplementary planning documents, subject to approval processes in paragraph 21a.

c. Create Mayoral Development Corporations, which will support delivery on strategic sites in the Sheffield City Region. This power will be exercised with the consent of the Cabinet member in which the Development Corporation is to be used.

d. Be consulted on and/or call-in planning applications of strategic importance to the City Region.

22. Sheffield City Region and HMG will continue to discuss the devolution of housing loan funds to a Spending Review timetable. Sheffield City Region intends to develop

12

further a proposition on a Housing Investment Fund, for discussion and development with HM Government.

23. HMG will work with Sheffield City Region to support the operation of the Joint Assets Board, and support better coordination on asset sales. This will include ensuring the representation of senior HMG officials on the Joint Assets Board, using that Board to develop as far as possible and consistent with the government’s overall public sector land target, a joint programme of asset disposal using a portfolio approach, and to explore whether a right of first refusal for 28 days on all central government land and assets due for disposal can be developed that accelerates the pace of disposal. Through the Joint Assets Board, SCR and HMG will explore increased opportunities for using the public estate to generate low carbon energy.

Transport

24. The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be responsible for a devolved and consolidated local transport budget for the area of the Combined Authority (i.e. the areas of the constituent councils), including all relevant devolved highways funding, with a multi-year settlement to be agreed at the Spending Review. Functions will be devolved to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority accordingly, to be exercised by the Mayor.

25. The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will by 2017 exercise functions, devolved to the Combined Authority, for the franchising of bus services in the area of the Combined Authority, subject to local consultation. This will be enabled through a specific Buses Bill, to be introduced during the first Parliamentary session, which will provide for the necessary functions to be devolved.

26. This will help to facilitate the delivery of integrated smart ticketing across all local modes of transport in the city region, working as part of Transport for the North on their plans for smart ticketing across the North. This includes the production of a regional implementation plan for smart ticketing which Transport for the North will put forward to government by Budget 2016.

27. Government remains committed to the development of Phase Two of the HS2 network and will announce the way forward on Phase Two later this year.

28. Government is committed to building a Northern Powerhouse and remains strongly committed to the work by Transport for the North to identify and present to government a prioritised list of scheme options for the TransNorth rail enhancement programme and options for strategic road investment, including options for a new TransPennine Road Tunnel, by Budget 2016.

29. Government, in consultation with Sheffield City Region, will continue to explore options to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority more control over the planning and delivery of local transport schemes, particularly in preparation for HS2. This could include changes to the way that Transport and Works Act Orders are

13

granted, if practical proposals for improving and speeding up the process are identified.

30. The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will take responsibility for an identified Key Route Network of local authority roads that will be collaboratively managed and maintained at a city region level by the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority across the areas of the constituent councils.

Trade and investment

31. HM Government commits to strengthening support available for both trade and investment in the Sheffield City Region.

32. On co-location, HM Government will review the Inward Investment resource location of regional (IST) staff across the three levels of: Partnership Managers; Business development and Key Account Management teams, currently in 8 locations nationally. HM Government will also look at options for co-location, under UKTI/IST management, without harming the overall efficiency of the working of the investment model.

33. On governance, HM Government will set up a joint governance structure (or join an existing one), with quarterly meetings attended by a Director level representative from both UKTI investment and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. These will provide a forum to discuss progress on co-location, and on account management activity by both parties in the region. HM Government will wherever possible also use this structure to review key decisions and initiatives planned and/or implemented by both parties, including building a better shared understanding of the inward investment opportunities available in the region.

34. On international links, HM Government will provide a strengthened partnership between locally delivered services and embassy/consulate contacts through project Matchmaker.

35. On the Great campaign, HM Government will explore what options exist for using a portion of GREAT campaign budget for overseas based activity aligned to Sheffield City Region sector strengths with delivery managed by UKTI Marketing teams with input and influence from Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. This activity should be supported by sector based resource in overseas posts who have been specially briefed to have a strong understanding of Northern Powerhouse and Posts who are Matchmaker partners for Sheffield City Region sector strengths.

36. HM Government will also work with Sheffield City Region to build attractive regeneration/ investment propositions.

37. On trade: HM Government will ring-fence trade services resource within Sheffield City Region, develop an agreed export plan with a dual key approach to activities and reporting on outputs and outcomes to Sheffield City Region. Ring fenced resource remains subject to departmental budget changes.

14

38. An export plan will be agreed between SCR and UKTI HQ which will allow SCR flexibility, such as a specific local sectoral focus for Passport to Export and mid-sized business schemes or a different mix of products.

39. HMRC will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to provide relevant trade statistics data, within existing data protection assurance frameworks and policies, to assist with understanding the City Region’s export market.

Innovation

40. The Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District, centred around the Advanced Manufacturing Park is a nationally important asset and already delivers growth through innovation, productivity and high value employment. The City Region has an ambition to make the District world-leading – attracting investment and major industry to the area.

41. To support this HM Government will offer the Sheffield City Region expert advice and support to ensure they are able to put forward a City Region led proposal to undertake a Science and Innovation audit. This work will enable an evidence based approach to deepen the understanding of the City Region’s Science and Innovation strengths and provide a new and powerful way to understand how to maximise the economic impact from the UK’s research and innovation investment nationally. They will, for example, provide government with part of the evidence base on which to make decisions on catapults and could be used to explore how to further the Sheffield City Region’s advantage in advanced manufacturing.

42. HM Government will also offer Sheffield City Region Combined Authority dedicated workshops with the Smart Specialisation Advisory Hub to help areas identify their innovation strengths.

43. Through utilisation of the additional resources in the single pot it is expected that Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will bring forward a set of ambitious proposals to enhance the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District.

44. The Sheffield City Region will work with HM Government to achieve their ambitions for a National Institute for Infrastructure within Doncaster. The Sheffield City Region will take forward discussions with HM Government to explore the potential for alignment of the new National College for High Speed Rail (NCHSR) based in Doncaster with the new Institutes of Technology to help meet a wider set of national infrastructure challenges.

Business growth and support

45. HM Government agrees to continue to work with the Sheffield City Region to develop and implement proposals for a devolved approach to the delivery of national business support programmes from April 2017 onwards, subject to the

15

outcomes of the Spending Review, and in line with the Devolution Deal agreed in December 2014.

46. Government and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will agree a joint programme to create the right environment to drive the commercial rollout of ultrafast broadband. Government will also support the SCR Combined Authority to reinvest funds into creative solutions to supplying superfast broadband to the last 5%.

47. Building on the currently agreed Enterprise Zone geography, Sheffield City Region will receive additional Enterprise Zones and/or extension of existing zones, subject to the current bidding round for further Enterprise Zones.

48. The Sheffield City Region LEP has requested additional flexibility on the use of Enhanced Capital Allowances within its Enterprise Zones. The government is open to further discussion on this providing proposals are compliant with State Aid rules and are fiscally neutral.

Fiscal

49. HM Government is committed to working with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to achieve Intermediate Body status for ERDF and ESF for the Combined Authority. HM Government will work with Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to test whether it will be possible to implement and if so, HMG and SCR will work together to agree a timetable to put this in place.

50. HM Government agrees to allocate an additional £30m per annum of capital and revenue funding for 30 years, which will form part of and capitalise the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority single pot. This will fund key City Region priorities and will be composed of 60% capital and 40% revenue. The fund will be subject to 5-yearly gateway assessments to confirm the spend has contributed to national growth.

51. HM Government will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to agree specific funding flexibilities to a Spending Review timetable. The joint ambition will be to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority a single pot to invest in its economic growth. This pot will comprise a flexible, multi-year settlement providing the freedom to deliver its growth priorities, including the ability to re-direct funding to reflect changing priorities, whilst upholding their statutory duties. This local freedom will be over a range of budgets to be determined by SCR and HMG in the run-up to and beyond the Spending Review, including as requested the Regional Growth Fund or its equivalent successor. HM Government expects to disburse this agreed settlement to the Sheffield City Region annually in advance.

52. The Cities and Local Government Devolution bill currently in parliament will establish the principles which will govern further prudential borrowing for combined authorities. Following Royal Assent, central government will consider how these powers could apply whilst ensuring no fiscal impact.

16

53. HM Government will pilot a scheme in Sheffield City Region Combined Authority which will enable the area to retain 100% of any additional business rate growth beyond expected forecasts. These pilots will begin in April 2016, subject to further detailed discussions between the Combined Authority and HM Government. HM Government will also discuss wider localisation of business rates with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority.

Under this geography:

54. The Mayor for the Sheffield City Region will be elected by the local government electors for the areas of the constituent councils of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. The Mayor and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will exercise the powers and responsibilities described in this document in relation to its area, i.e. the area of the constituent councils of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority.

55. Funding that is allocated to the SCR LEP, now and in the future, will continue to be allocated on the basis of the existing overlap formula.

56. Additional funding or budgets that are devolved as a result of this agreement will go to the SCR Combined Authority.

57. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority must exercise functions in relation to its geographical area. Accordingly, if any of the Combined Authority spend is on activities of projects outside of its area, those activities or projects must in some way relate to the area – for example, be for the benefit of the area; they may also relate to some other area. The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill, subject to parliamentary approval, can enable combined authorities such as the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to take on a broader set of functions than economic development, regeneration and transport, dependent on secondary legislation.

58. Under the Mayor model, it is not expected that the role of the LEP or private sector be lessened.

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority commitments

59. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority is accountable to local people for the successful implementation of the Devolution Deal; consequently, HM Government expects Sheffield City Region to monitor and evaluate their Deal in order to demonstrate and report on progress. The Cities and Local Growth Unit will work with the Sheffield City Region to agree a monitoring and evaluation framework that meets local needs and helps to support future learning.

60. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will work with HM Government to develop a full implementation plan, covering each policy agreed in this Deal, to be completed ahead of implementation. This plan will include the timing and proposed

17

approach for monitoring and evaluation of each policy and should be approved by the DCLG Accounting Officer.

61. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will continue to set out their proposals to HM Government for how local resources and funding will be pooled across the city region.

62. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will agree overall borrowing limits with HM Government and have formal agreement to engage on forecasting. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will also provide information, explanation and assistance to the Office for Budget Responsibility where such information would assist in meeting their duty to produce economic and fiscal forecasts for the UK economy.

63. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will agree a process to manage local financial risk relevant to these proposals and will jointly develop written agreements with HM Government on every devolved power or fund to agree accountability between local and national bodies on the basis of the principles set out in this document.

64. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will continue to progress programmes of transformation amongst authorities to streamline back office functions and share more services and data, including on assets and property.

65. The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will continue to adhere to their public sector equality duties, for both existing and newly devolved responsibilities.

Appendix B – Summary of progress made on devolution deal

Element of the Proposal

Proposal text Summary of progress made

Overview– funding confirmation (para 3)

That all levels of funding are subject to the Spending Review (SR)

The £900m of additional funding committed by the Proposal was confirmed by the SR. The first year’s payment of £30m will occur in April 2016, subject to the ratification of this proposal by the constituent local authorities. The allocations made to the SCR as part of the Growth Deal process (c£310m 2016-2021) were also indicatively confirmed through the SR.

Overview– legislation (para 3)

The agreement was subject to the enactment of the necessary legislation (The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill and the Buses Bill), and to parliamentary approval of the secondary legislation implementing the provisions of this agreement.

The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill has received Royal Assent. This includes ‘amendment 31’ that enables a district or county council to join an existing Combined Authority without the need for the agreement of the district or county council respectively. It is expected that the draft Buses Bill will be published in February.

Governance – mayoral model (paras 3-5)

Details set out in paragraphs 3-5 of the proposed Deal document on the Mayoral Combined Authority

Since the proposal was made, local leaders have been working with Government to agree a suitable Mayoral Combined Authority (“MCA”) model, this includes working through the detail of:

the functions, powers and duties of the MCA;

the distribution of these functions between the CA and the mayor: the ‘checks and balances’ that would exist between the mayor and the CA;

the relationship between constituent and non-constituent councils;

the role of the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) within these arrangements; and

other operational and constitutional details.




Governance – mayoral voting rights on the CA (para 4)

Proposals for decision by the Combined Authority may be put forward by the Mayor or any Cabinet Member. The Mayor will have one vote as will other voting members. Any questions that are to be decided by the Combined Authority are to be decided by a majority of the members present and voting, subject to that majority including the vote of the Mayor, unless otherwise set out in legislation, or specifically delegated through the Authority's Constitution.

One concern raised by local partners since the proposed Deal was signed was that the mayor could have a ‘veto’ over all CA functions. Following high-level discussions with ministers and senior civil servants, it has expressly been confirmed that this is not the case. The relationship between the CA and the mayor is a matter that can be dealt with through a refresh of the CA’s constitution, and these arrangements would be owned locally by the MCA. In short, we believe that there is a way to accommodate both the requirements of the Proposal and the wishes of local Leaders and are working with CLG to this end.

Skills, employment and education – 19+ skills (para 11)

Greater understanding of the readiness conditions for devolution set out in paragraph 11.

Ongoing discussions with BIS and the SFA around what constitutes the readiness conditions for full devolution of the 19+ adult skills funding. Work on the Area Based Review has progressed and is due to be completed in April.

Skills, employment and education –employment support (paras 16-19)

Paragraphs 16-19 on the co-design and co-commissioning of future employment support.

Whilst there has been positive engagement with the DWP the Skills and Employment Executive Board consider that greater engagement is required from the DWP to be able to successfully implement the co-design and co-commissioning elements of the proposed Deal. SCR and Government officials are working to ensure that this issue is clarified.

Skills, employment and education – hardest to help pilot

Sheffield City Region will develop a business case for an innovative pilot to support those who are hardest to help. The business case should set out the evidence to support the proposed pilot, cost and benefits and robust evaluation plans, to enable the proposal to be taken forward as part of the delivery of this agreement, subject to Ministerial approval.

SCR has developed an initial Business Case for this pilot, which was submitted to the Government in November. Based on initial feedback this Business Case is now being further developed to ensure that it makes the best evidenced case to enable the proposal to be taken forward.




Housing and Planning – housing investment fund (para 22)

Sheffield City Region and HMG will continue to discuss the devolution of housing loan funds to a Spending Review timetable. Sheffield City Region intends to develop further a proposition on a Housing Investment Fund, for discussion and development with HM Government.

The Spending Review made considerable changes to the Government’s approach to supporting housing delivery. Within this context the Sheffield City Region will continue to discuss the potential for devolved funding or control over national housing resources. The SCR has continued to develop local proposals for a Housing Capital programme – and discussions with the Government will take place throughout February to continue to make the case for an SCR Housing Investment Fund.

Housing and planning – assets (para 23)

HMG will work with Sheffield City Region to support the operation of the Joint Assets Board, and support better coordination on asset sales.

HMG have a representative on the current Joint Assets Board. Since the proposed deal was signed on October 2nd the SCR has also been successful in a One Public Estate bid which has secured national funding to support improvement alignment of national and local assets.

Transport – devolved and consolidated transport budget (para 24)

The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be responsible for a devolved and consolidated local transport budget for the area of the Combined Authority (i.e. the areas of the constituent councils), including all relevant devolved highways funding, with a multi-year settlement to be agreed at the Spending Review.

Based on the overarching budgets announced in the SR, allocations for areas with (proposed) Devolution Deals are currently being calculated. The SCR expects more information on this in February.

Trade and investment – governance (para 33)

On governance, HM Government will set up a joint governance structure (or join an existing one), with quarterly meetings attended by a Director level representative from both UKTI investment and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority.

It is expected that the Regional Director of UKTI will attend quarterly meetings with the Business Growth Executive Board to address this issue. Officer level working relationships are in place.

Innovation – Science and Innovation Audit (para 41)

HM Government will offer the Sheffield City Region expert advice and support to ensure they are able to put forward a City Region led proposal to undertake a Science and Innovation audit.

The SCR submitted a Science and Innovation Audit expression of interest on the 29th January. Support and advice from BIS was received throughout that process.




Innovation – smart specialisation (para 42)

HM Government will also offer Sheffield City Region Combined Authority dedicated workshops with the Smart Specialisation Advisory Hub to help areas identify their innovation strengths.

Dedicated workshops on this issue will be organised with the City Region through the Science and Innovation Audit work.

Fiscal – ESIF (para 49)

HM Government is committed to working with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to achieve Intermediate Body (IB) status for ERDF and ESF for the Combined Authority.

Work has progressed and it is expected that the SCR will be able to make a decision in March as to whether to become an Intermediate Body for the selection of ESIF Projects.

Fiscal – single pot (para 51)

HM Government will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to agree specific funding flexibilities to a Spending Review timetable. The joint ambition will be to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority a single pot to invest in its economic growth.

Positive discussions held with HM Government on this joint ambition. SCR to provide greater details of the funding flexibilities it is seeking as part of the construction of its single pot. Joint work also to take place on the development of a set of outcomes for the single pot as well as an appropriate set of accountability arrangements.-

Fiscal – business rates (para 53)

HM Government will pilot a scheme in Sheffield City Region Combined Authority which will enable the area to retain 100% of any additional business rate growth beyond expected forecasts.

SCR is currently working with HM Government to agree the baseline against which additional growth will be calculated. This pilot is expected to commence in April 2016 enabling the City Region to have some additional resources to invest in growing the local economy over the next four years. An approach is being developed, which will ensure that through local retention of Business Rate growth, all SCR districts can benefit financially.

Appendix C_SCR Devolution Consultation – summary report

1

SCR Devolution Consultation:

results summary

Summary

This paper provides a summary of the results from the online consultation which enabled people, businesses

and community organisations in Sheffield City Region (SCR) to have their say on the proposed SCR Devolution

Agreement.

The survey included a number of open questions about the proposed Agreement, enabling respondents to

offer written (ie. free text) comments, questions and thoughts without the limitations of tick box responses.

The survey was also designed to be non-linear, ensuring that people could answer the questions that most

interested them and ignore the ones that did not.

The online consultation ran from 2nd December 2015 to 15th January 2016 and attracted 245 responses from

across SCR.

This report summarises the perspectives of respondents to each question in the survey. Whilst it is not

possible to provide a statistically robust quantitative assessment of the results because of the qualitative

design, the report offers a sense of how respondents from SCR feel about key elements of the proposed

Agreement.

Further, it is important to recognise that while the survey provides an important and useful perspective of

people in SCR on the devolution proposals, it is a relatively small sample and is relatively unrepresentative of

some key population groups (eg. under 25s).

Key trends and perspectives from the responses:

Positive support throughout for principle of stronger local control of decision-making

Recognition of the impact that specific policy areas could have on SCR and the local economy

Negative perceptions of the need for an elected mayor – mainly due to creation of additional

bureaucracy; complexity with existing arrangements; outcome of 2012 city mayor referenda

Real need for clarity about the geographical scope of the mayoral arrangement and powers,

particularly for East Midlands districts

Positive about potential for more devolution, particularly once the current set of proposals have

been implemented. Suggestions are ambitious and radical including tax raising powers, all skills,

public transport, education and health.

Purpose

1. This report provides a summary of the results from the local consultation activity which sought the views of

people, groups and businesses in Sheffield City Region (SCR) on the proposed SCR Devolution Agreement.

2. The report is predominantly based on the online survey as the main route for comments and contributions to

the discussion but also builds in views from the wider consultation activity under the themes.


2

Having your say on devolution: background and methodology

Background

3. The proposed Devolution Agreement for Sheffield City Region stated that the policy and funding proposals in

the Agreement were subject to the 2015 Spending Review, and to Sheffield City Region “consulting on the

proposals and ratification from the local authorities”1.

4. Following the announcement, SCR developed a programme of consultation to enable local residents,

businesses and community organisations across the SCR area to have their say on the proposals.

5. This programme of consultation has generated a range of activities and contributions including from:

Local residents - large scale online survey for the public, businesses and representative organisations

Business - engagement with businesses including through the SCR Local Enterprise Partnership (SCRLEP);

a Business Insider event with the Chambers of Commerce; and local business advisory panels

Local democratic bodies – including Overview and Scrutiny Committees; locality assemblies; a dedicated

meeting of the SCR Scrutiny Board; and the SCR Combined Authority

Partners and community organisations – including detailed submissions from community organisations

and the University of Sheffield’s Crick Centre ‘Citizens’ Assembly’ project2

Direct correspondence – in some instances, we have also received direct letters and emails from some

residents and community organisations, including Sheffield Citizens Advice, Age UK, Cavendish Cancer

Care, Sheffield Mencap, and Voluntary Action Sheffield.

Online survey

6. The online survey was the main, large-scale form of consultation on the proposed Devolution Agreement.

The survey was launched on the 2nd December 2015 and ran until the 15th January 2016.

7. The survey was supported by a dedicated SCR microsite which provided respondents with a range of

information, explanations, FAQs and videos explaining both the concept of devolution and what the

proposed Agreement could mean for SCR. The site also included a link to the full devolution document and

testimonials from leading SCR politicians, business leaders and academics.

Fig 1: SCR Devolution Survey Fig 2: SCR Devolution microsite

1 HMG (2015) Sheffield City Region Devolution Agreement, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/466616/Sheffield_devolution_deal_October_2015_with_signatures.pdf 2 University of Sheffield’s Crick Centre (2016) Citizens’ Assembly North, http://citizensassembly.co.uk/home-page/sheffield/

http://sheffieldcityregiondevolution.org.uk/

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/466616/Sheffield_devolution_deal_October_2015_with_signatures.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/466616/Sheffield_devolution_deal_October_2015_with_signatures.pdf

http://citizensassembly.co.uk/home-page/sheffield/


3

8. The survey was widely publicised across the City Region, including activities by all nine local authorities and

coverage in the local (eg. local papers), regional (eg. Yorkshire Post; BBC Look North) and national media (eg.

BBC News website). The survey link and microsite was also regularly promoted through social media

channels by councils, SCR Combined Authority and partner organisations.

9. The main purpose for the survey was to enable people and organisations across SCR to give their unrestricted

views on the SCR devolution proposals and not limit people’s responses with structured quantitative

questions (ie. tick box). Therefore, the survey was purposefully designed to be:

Open-ended – the survey questions enabled people to give qualitative (ie. written word/free text)

answers rather than ticking boxes

Non-linear – which means that people could answer the questions that interested them and ignore the

questions that didn’t interest them

10. The survey asked people about their views on devolution proposals for SCR as a whole and therefore it was

decided not ask respondents which part of the City Region they lived in. The survey did, however, ask

respondents what they thought the impact of the devolution proposals would be on their life and where they

lived.

Who responded?

11. In total, there were 245 responses from across Sheffield City Region. As Fig 3 shows, respondents are

broadly representative of the working age population of the City Region with some over-representation of

people aged 40+. However, very few people aged under 25 responded to the survey.

12. Fig 4 demonstrates that the majority of responses were from local residents (82%) with a further 10% from

businesses and 6% on behalf of community and interest groups in the City Region.

13. Respondents were overwhelmingly male with 170 (73%) men responding to the survey compared to 62

(27%) women.

14. Respondents were predominantly (95%) from a White British ethnic heritage and that group were slightly

over-represented compared to the 16+ population of SCR. Similarly, respondents from a Black and Minority

Ethnic (BME) background were under-represented compared to the local population and indeed, very few

people from BME backgrounds actually responded to the survey.

15. It is important to recognise that while the survey provides an important and useful perspective of people in

SCR on the devolution proposals, it is a relatively small sample and is relatively unrepresentative of some key

population groups (eg. under 25s).

Fig 3: Consultation respondents by age Fig 4: Consultation respondents by type


4

Fig 5: Consultation respondents by ethnic heritage

3

Survey results

16. This section provides an overview of the views offered by respondents in SCR about the proposed Devolution

Agreement. As suggested elsewhere, the survey was not designed to produce numerical or quantifiable

results but rather to give people, businesses and community organisations the opportunity to comment and

have their say on the devolution proposals.

17. Therefore, responses were written in free text and this report aims to provide a summary of the key themes

and issues raised by respondents by question based on the key words and comments made. Where possible

or appropriate, the report also attempts to offer a perspective as to whether the tone of the responses

received to a particular question were positive, negative or mixed. This is not intended to be statistically

robust but is a relatively simple way of summarising a large number of written responses.

Do respondents want more information about the Devolution Agreement?

“The Sheffield City Region Devolution website provides lots of information about the powers, resources

and implications for local areas of the in-principle devolution deal. Is there anything else you would like to

know?”

18. This question enabled people to comment on the information that was provided to respondents on the SCR

devolution microsite and areas about which they would like to receive more information.

19. The areas which respondents would like more information on from the 79 responses to the question

predominantly relate to four main themes:

3 Population comparison data from Census 2011, ONS.


5

Accountability and decision making – respondents clearly would like to understand more about the

proposed new democratic arrangements in SCR. In particular, respondents want more information

about the democratic process for the proposed directly elected mayor (eg. who can vote?); how

decisions will be made under the new structures; the transparency of those decisions; and how the

public can get involved and engaged in future decision making.

Powers and money available – respondents clearly know more about what the devolved powers will

mean for the City Region and for the specific areas within SCR. This includes more information about the

amount of new money SCR will receive; whether there are guarantees to and specific requests for more

information about the impact of the Devolution Agreement on specific policy areas (predominantly

transport/infrastructure; planning).

Geography – there were specific references to places within SCR with requests for more information

about what the proposed Devolution Agreement means for that area; whether there are different

arrangements for the non-SCR districts; and implications for the wider local geography (eg. the county

councils and Yorkshire).

Transition – there were also comments about process of moving to the proposed mayoral combined

authority arrangements, particularly the potential costs of such a move and whether such a move could

be reversed.

Perspectives on the concept of devolution to city regions

“Do you have any views on whether local areas like the Sheffield City Region should be given more powers

and resources from national government to run local transport systems, create more businesses and

generate more jobs?”

20. This question asked respondents about their views on devolution and whether powers should be devolved

down to local areas from central government to deliver locally-focused outcomes.

21. Analysis of the responses received show that respondents’ perspectives

on devolution are reasonably split with around a third of comments

being positive and a fifth being more negative. The main reasons given

for these firm perspectives were:

Positive – strong support for the principle of greater local control over decision making, particularly in

order to improve transport, public services and bring decision making closer to local voters

Negative – a lower number of responses were strongly negative but the main concerns were about the

proposed elected mayor; the geographical scale of the proposed model (preference for Yorkshire) and

public engagement and transparency in relation to the proposed Devolution Agreement.

22. In some ways, the summary statistics to this question are unhelpful because they mask the large number of

comments made which are generally supportive of the principle of devolution but that support is caveated

by a number of concerns about devolution to SCR (hence ‘mixed’ views). These reservations predominantly

fall under a small number of common themes:


6

Governance and geography – concerns about the potential for new layers of ‘bureaucracy’; preference

for a wider Yorkshire geography; whether the public and the private sector will be fully involved in

decision making; and questions about how much real autonomy SCR will have

Local decision making capacity – concerns about the track record and ability of places in SCR to work

together and make the decisions to maximise the benefits for the whole of SCR

Government’s motivations – some respondents questioned whether Government would really devolve

power and whether devolution would just lead to more cuts

More powers – suggestions that the proposed agreement could go further, particularly involving more

funding.

Reflections on the specific policy themes within the proposed Devolution Agreement

23. The online survey included a section of questions which enabled respondents to offer their views on the

specific policy themes contained within the proposed Devolution Agreement for SCR. As the survey was non-

linear, people could choose to respond to all these areas or just the ones that interested them.

24. Respondents were encouraged and directed to read the content of the proposed Devolution Agreement and

the SCR microsite before answering these questions.

25. The table below (Fig 6) provides a summary of the main comments by policy theme. While responses to

each questions largely related to the respective policy theme, several common areas were present across all

themes which are worth reflecting on and may need to be addressed if the proposed Agreement is finalised.

These themes were:

Recognition of the opportunity – across all the policy themes involved, a number of respondents made

comments and statements which recognised what the a particular power might bring to the SCR

economy

Awareness and understanding – building on the question earlier in the survey, the policy theme

questions demonstrate that SCR need to improve awareness and understanding of how any new powers

will work; what the ultimate aim/outcome is intended to be; and how decisions will be made to deploy

the new power.

Local capacity to deliver – possibly related to the challenges around awareness and understanding, there

is a consistent challenge from respondents about whether SCR can manage the proposed new powers in

a way that supports the SCR economic strategy and all the districts within SCR.

Geography – as elsewhere, a number of people raise questions relating to geography both in terms of

whether all places in SCR will receive the benefits of any devolution arrangement and whether a larger

geography (ie. Yorkshire) might be more appropriate.


7

Fig 6: policy theme questions – summary of responses

Theme Summary of responses

Employment, skills and education

Respondents were largely positive about focusing on skills for employment

The main concern was around the lack of control over apprenticeships and 16-18 education

Some concern over whether skills and jobs will be available across the SCR areas or whether the big urban areas will dominate, particularly at the expense of rural areas.

There is also a feeling that a focus on manufacturing jobs would be beneficial

Importance of progression through training system (ie. to ensure people continue to develop)

Some concerns about quality of existing provision in SCR and whether devolved control will improve this

Transport

A similar proportion of respondents made positive and negative comments in this area, but the majority either made no comments or didn’t indicate a whether they agreed with the current plans or not.

Improved links with the wider area, including Yorkshire and Trans-Pennine

Some support for bus franchising and ‘TfL powers’

A lot of concern for rural public transport and need for public transport to be affordable

Comments expressing that the HS2 issue in SCR needs to be resolved

A number of positive comments about the prospect of smart-ticketing

A feeling that public transport needs to be much more integrated (ie. with other modes of transport in SCR) and with wider planning (housing, infrastructure)

Financial

As with transport, more than half of respondents were not clear whether they feel positively or negatively about the proposals in this area. Almost a quarter of respondents made negative comments, with only one in ten making comments that were supportive of the proposals.

Some recognition of the need to be able to invest for the long term

A consistently emerging theme is scepticism about ability to manage these decisions locally.

Concern that £30m over 30 years is not enough annually and will not replace the money that has been lost through budget cuts

Concerns about how the money will be managed and whether all areas will benefit (eg. SY or all SCR districts; urban v rural)

Business growth

Fewer numbers of respondents provided answers to this question, possibly reflecting that the great majority of respondents were individual residents of SCR who may not use business support services.

Supportive comments focused predominantly on the opportunity to support smaller businesses in SCR, the attraction more businesses/investment, and closer alignment with national programmes (eg. UKTI).

There were some contrasting views about the focus for business report, including whether there should or should not be a focus on key locations (eg. M1 corridor; AMRC etc)

Commonality with other questions about the ability of SCR councils to manage business support effectively.

Housing and planning Of those who made comments, more respondents gave negative views than positive.

The main area of positivity was around the prospect of better regional


8

planning, particularly linked to plans for wider infrastructure.

The lack of new social/affordable housing was a common area of challenge from respondents

Clear concerns about where development occurs. A number of respondents argue for protection of the Green Belt in SCR and the focus should be on brownfield land.

Views on the proposed directly elected mayor

“The Government has made it clear that in return for more powers and resources to be devolved to the

Sheffield City Region the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will have to agree to the creation of

directly-elected Mayor who will work in partnership with local politicians and the private sector. What are

your views on this?”

26. The development of the directly elected city region mayor model by

Government through the most recent Devolution Agreements has

generated headlines and therefore increased public awareness. While

respondents could choose which questions to answer, only around 10%

failed to actually address this question, possibly reflecting the

importance of the issue to local people.

27. Respondents are predominantly more negative of the proposal for an elected mayor in SCR than they are

elsewhere about devolution or the specific policy themes. Reasons given for concerns about the mayoral

model are wide-ranging but areas which attract greatest concern are:

Concern about the perceived financial cost and an increase in bureaucracy with an additional tier of

governance

Sense that Sheffield voted not to have an elected (city) mayor in the referendum of 2012 and potential

confusion with the existing Mayor of Doncaster

Concern about the executive power that any elected mayor may have over the City Region, with

particular reference to the mayoral ‘veto’ over policy decisions

The threat to the City Region of having a poor quality candidate (and conversely, the importance of

getting high calibre candidates). Many people suggested that the mayoral role should not be a party

political one

Concerns about the electoral geography, with some respondents suggesting that the mayor should cover

the whole SCR; some fearing the implications for areas in SCR that do not vote for the mayor; and others

not wanting to be part of the mayoral geography

A number of references to the imposition of the mayoral model by Government

28. As suggested by the statistics above, there were positive views expressed about the potential for mayoral

leadership in the SCR, with respondents particularly focusing on the potential for a single figurehead for

decision-making in SCR as long as the right powers are available.


9

Benefits of the proposed Devolution Agreement

“What do you think the main benefits of the devolution deal are for you/your area?”

29. Over half of respondents made positive statements about the potential benefits of the proposed Devolution

Agreement for them or their local area. Around a third of respondents felt there were unlikely to be any

benefits.

30. The main areas that respondents cited as being benefits were:

The ability to make faster, locally-focused decisions is seen as positive, with the ability to be more

flexible and deliver change more quickly.

Stronger local accountability and local influence over decisions to focus resources to the places that need

it in SCR

Business growth and jobs are seen as potential benefits

Improvement to public transport, bus regulation and the introduction of smart-ticketing.

31. The negative comments were either due to scepticism about the whole devolution process or a lack of clarity

about what the benefits are, something which needs to be considered if the Devolution Agreement moves

forward. Further, this area raised questions about what the benefits will be for places within SCR,

particularly the districts in the North Midlands and whether the Devolution Agreement will create confusion

over who provides services in the area.


10

Further devolution to SCR

32. The final questions looked at firstly whether SCR’s Leaders should look to receive more devolved powers

from Government and if so, what powers they should seek.

“Do you have any views on whether Sheffield City Region Leaders should try to secure more powers and

devolution in the future?”

33. Approximately 40% of respondents felt that SCR should try to secure more powers and devolution in the

future; 20% felt they should not. Respondents were notably keen for the current and proposed devolution

proposal to bed-in before further powers are devolved to SCR.

34. The majority of the comments against further devolution were either fairly blunt (ie. “no”) this this question

in particular led a number of respondents to suggest devolution as part of a wider geography (eg. Greater

Yorkshire; English Parliament).

“What further powers and resources to achieve our vision for growth, if any, should be devolved to the City

Region?”

35. Where respondents chose to respond to this question, there were a broad range of suggestions for what

additional powers SCR may seek from Government. Suggestions included:

Education

Under-19s skills (“all skills”)

Housing

Police and emergency services

Dedicated investment

Arts and culture

Public transport based on the TfL model

Railways

Tax setting and tax raising powers

Air quality / clean air zones

‘Manchester model’

‘Scottish model’

36. There were a number of additional comments from respondents who commented that additional powers

should be devolved but to a Yorkshire or Greater Yorkshire geography.

1. Issue

1.1. Each year, under law, the Combined Authority (CA) is required to set a balanced revenue budget.

1.2. The CA’s overall revenue budget consists of two parts:

The South Yorkshire transport budget; and,

The CA/LEP economic development activity budget.

1.3. These two budgets are kept distinct from one another to reflect that the South Yorkshire transport levy should only be used to support South Yorkshire transport activity. The budget for this activity was agreed by Leaders on the 1st February.

Summary

This paper proposes a revenue budget for CA/LEP activity in 2016/17.

The paper highlights material proposed growth in the CA/LEP’s non-programme expenditure, particularly around staffing, marketing, and development costs.

This reflects the absorption of the Transport Hub cost base into the CA/LEP budget for the first time, but also wider growth in activity as the CA/LEP operationalises the Strategic Economic Plan.

The paper shows that many cost pressures are offset by a significant increase in income accrued from Enterprise Zone retained business rates.

However, income generated is not sufficient to cover the growth in expenditure. Increases in subscriptions are required to meet this cost pressure.

Reflecting sensitivity to partner budget pressures, the paper proposes a means of sharing this pressure to ensure that no partner authority pays more to the CA as a Financial Group than it did in financial year 2015/16.

14th March 2016

CA/LEP REVENUE BUDGET

1.4. This paper proposes a revenue budget for the forthcoming 2016/17 financial year for the CA/LEP activity.

1.5. This budget (£10.41m) is crucial to ensuring that the CA can deliver its Strategic Economic Plan (SEP), and the outcomes it pledged to government in order to secure its Local Growth Fund (LGF) settlements.

1.6. The CA/LEP revenue budget is usefully split into two parts:

Core work streams performed by the SCR Executive Team (£5.2m or 50% of the £10.41m total budget); and,

Specific (time limited) programme activity for distinctly funded work streams (£5.2m or 50% of the £10.41m).

1.7. The make-up of the proposed CA/LEP revenue budget is indicative of the work that has been underway to pivot activity towards the operationalisation of the SEP, particularly reflecting the challenges that have been experienced in 2015/16 around supporting practical delivery of schemes.

1.8. This is reflected in the growth in staffing costs as skill sets and experience is brought to the SCR Executive.

1.9. However, it also marks a growing need for the SCR to promote itself and bring transparency to its activity. This is reflected in proposed increases in marketing and communications budgets.

1.10. A large element in the growth in CA/LEP expenditure is also related to the adoption of the Transport Hub cost-base (£1m / 34%). The Transport team were previously employed and funded through the CA’s transport subsidiary SYPTE. The costs of the team were met by South Yorkshire partners.

1.11. The adoption of this team into the SCR Executive means the cost of the team – and the requirement to fund them – moves from the SYPTE budget to the CA/LEP budget.

1.12. The CA/LEP receives revenue income from a number of sources, including:

Government through grant awards;

Local partners through Enterprise Zone business rates growth (EZ growth), and subscriptions; and,

Income generated from investing surplus cash.

1.13. Budget development work shows that despite an increase in EZ growth, income generation has not kept pace with expenditure pressures, principally due to the adoption of the Transport Hub costs.

1.14. Unresolved, this would lead to an unbalanced budget for 2016/17 which would necessitate an increase in subscriptions or curtailment of activity by £1m.

1.15. This paper proposes that the deficit of income over expenditure be shared between partners to ensure that no one authority pays more to the CA overall than it did in 2015/16.

1.16. This will ensure that no additional pressure is brought to bear on partner revenue budgets as a result of this proposed budget.

2. Recommendations

2.1. CEX approve the proposed £10.41m revenue budget;

2.2. CEX approve the means by which the £1m deficit associated with the adoption of the Transport Hub is shared amongst the partners; and,

2.3. CEX note the use of £1,114k from the CA/LEP LGF Revenue Reserve to support Business Growth programme activity.

3. Background Information

Revenue Budget: Proposed Shape

3.1. In 2015/16 the CA/LEP operated to a £9m revenue budget, which was split between distinctly funded planned programme activity of £6.9m, and core costs associated with the running of the SCR Executive of £2.1m.

3.2. We choose to differentiate between programme activity and core activity to reflect CA/LEP governance, particularly the strategic influence Executive Boards bring to bear on thematic programmes and the resourcing issues that fall under the purview of the SCR Executive Director.

3.3. The following graphic exemplifies this:

3.4. The growth in activity at the SCR Executive as the SEP is operationalised leads to proposed growth in core activity of £3m (147%). This growth is explained in more detail later in this paper

3.5. Proposed revenue programme activity falls by £1.7m (25%), largely reflecting that Skills Bank activity will be run by an external agency, but partially being offset by an increase in Business Growth activity. Programme activity is detailed in a more granular level later in this paper.

2015/16 2016/17 Variance Variance

£'000 £'000 £'000 %

Core Revenue Costs £2,109 £5,203 £3,094 147%

Programme Expenditure £6,882 £5,211 -£1,671 25%

Total Revenue Expenditure £8,991 £10,414 £1,423 16%

3.6. These costs are offset by several factors:

Recharges into programmes where activity is solely supporting a programme; and,

External income through: External grants; EZ retained business rates; Investment income; and, Partner contributions.

3.7. Income to the CA/LEP core budget has increased markedly (£1.9m) on 2015/16 levels

predominantly due to an increase in EZ retained business rates payable from Sheffield and Chesterfield. Recharges into programme and other activity is also marginally higher:

2015/16 % 2016/17 % Variance %

Income to support Core Budgets £'000 % £'000 % £'000 %

Recharges into programmes £94 4% £152 4% £58 3%

Non Programme External income £2,131 96% £4,051 96% £1,920 97%

Total £2,225 £4,203 £1,978

3.8. Programme funding has fallen in line with programme expenditure, such that programme activity is net-nil.

3.9. However, despite the increase in income, resource has not risen in line with cost pressures. This leads to a deficit of £1m:

2015/16

£'000

Core Revenue Costs £5,203

- Recharge Income -£152

- Non Programme External Income -£4,051

Deficit on Core Operations £1,000

3.10. This deficit is largely due to the £1m cost of the Transport Hub. This cost was previously borne by the South Yorkshire transport levy which funds SYPTE.

3.11. Because the cost no longer resides in the SYPTE budget, the transport levy has fallen by £1,035k. This represents a saving to the South Yorkshire authorities.

3.12. However, moving that cost onto the CA/LEP budget simply means that the cost

falls to be funded there creating the deficit shown.

3.13. Ordinarily, moving the cost to the CA/LEP budget would mean that if no other

funding was available the cost would be resourced by an increase on subscriptions.

3.14. The formula for sharing subscription costs was set pre-CA (pre 2014) to fund LEP activity, and has not been revisited since. Base subscriptions (factored into non-programme external income) currently stand at £204k overall and are split as follows:

2015/16 %

Base Partner Subscriptions £'000 %

Barnsley £32 16%

Bassetlaw £4 2%

Bolsover £4 2%

Chesterfield £4 2%

Derbyshire Dales £4 2%

Doncaster £41 20%

North East Derbyshire £4 2%

Rotherham £36 18%

Sheffield £76 37%

Total £204

3.15. Chief Executives have previously proposed that the costs of funding the CA

should not increase for any partners.

3.16. To meet this aspiration the base costs of the Transport Hub inherited from SYPTE cannot be shared be shared between the nine partners.

3.17. Simply, sharing a cost previously paid for by four authorities between nine

authorities will inevitably mean that the South Yorkshire authorities will benefit, whilst the North Midlands authorities will see a new cost (2% each of the cost pressure).

3.18. In this instance, with a pressure of £1m each of the North Midlands districts would be required to resource 2% or an additional £20k on current subscriptions. This would represent an increase on subscriptions of 500%.

£32, 16%

£4, 2%

£4, 2%

£4, 2%

£4, 2%

£41, 20%

£4, 2%

£36, 17%

£76, 37%

Barnsley

Bassetlaw

Bolsover

Chesterfield

Derbyshire Dales

Doncaster

North East Derbyshire

Rotherham

Sheffield

3.19. No matter what mitigation is put in place, so long as there is a net pressure resulting from the absorption of the Hub there will be winners and losers.

3.20. Accordingly, it is proposed that for 2016/17, the South Yorkshire authorities continue to meet the net cost of the Hub absorbed from SYPTE. This reflects that the Transport Hub team will still work on South Yorkshire activity, and that any growth in activity relating to regional issues results in a new pressure funded from general CA resource.

3.21. As part of the South Yorkshire transport levy setting process, £1,035k was

stripped from the levy to be transferred to the CA/LEP (this was not counted towards the 10% levy reduction). This resulted in a saving to the South Yorkshire partners. The net deficit on the CA/LEP budget is £1,000k, the £35k balance being resourced from other income. As such, the South Yorkshire partners will make a marginal saving as a result of this mechanism:

Saving Made on SY Transport Levy

Increase on Current CA/LEP Subscription

Saving Overall

South Yorkshire Contributions to the Transport Hub % £'000 £'000 £'000

Barnsley 17.41% 180 174 6

Doncaster 22.27% 230 223 8

Rotherham 19.04% 197 190 7

Sheffield 41.27% 427 413 14

Total 100% 1,035 1,000 35

3.22. It is further proposed that the issue of subscriptions should be reviewed in the context of the devolution monies, with consideration being given to abandoning the current model, funding the SCR Executive and associated activity solely from the gainshare revenue funding.

3.23. Subject to the above charging mechanism being approved, subscriptions for the partners will be as follows for 2016/17:

Base Transport Total

Subscriptions £'000 £'000 £'000

Barnsley £32 £174 £206

Bassetlaw £4 £0 £4

Bolsover £4 £0 £4

Chesterfield £4 £0 £4

Derbyshire Dales £4 £0 £4

Doncaster £41 £223 £264

North East Derbyshire £4 £0 £4

Rotherham £36 £190 £226

Sheffield £76 £413 £489

Total £204 £1,000 £1,204

3.24. Under this mechanism, no partner contributes more to the CA than they did in

financial year 2015/16.

3.25. The following table provides a composite breakdown of the shape of the revenue

budget:

2015/16 2016/17 Variance Variance

£'000 £'000 £'000 %

Core Operations £2,443 £6,224 £3,781 155%

- Capitalisations -£334 -£1,021 -£687 206%

Core Revenue Costs £2,109 £5,203 £3,094 147%

- Recharged costs -£94 -£152 -£58 62%

Net Core Expenditure £2,015 £5,051 £3,036 151%

Non-specific Income -£2,131 -£4,051 -£1,920 90%

Net Cost of Core Operations -£116 £1,000 £1,116

Programme Expenditure £6,882 £5,211 -£1,671 -24%

Programme Income -£6,882 -£5,211 £1,671 -24%

Net Cost of Programme Activity £0 £0 £0

Total Revenue Expenditure £8,991 £10,414 £1,423

Total Revenue Income -£9,107 -£9,414 -£307

-Surplus/Deficit -£116 £1,000 £1,116

Surplus Deficit

Additional Partner Contributions required £1,000

Income Profiles

Core Activity

3.26. Income (before additional partner contributions) to fund core CA/LEP activity has grown considerably on financial year 2015/16 (90%):

2015/16 % 2016/17 % Variance %

Non-specific Income £'000 % £'000 % £'000 %

EZ Retained Rates In Year £1,207 57% £2,724 67% £1,517 126%

EZ Retained Rates Prior Year Adjustment £0 0% £319 8% £319 -

LEP Grants £503 24% £500 12% -£3 -1%

Investment Income £120 6% £284 7% £164 137%

Base Partner Subscriptions £204 10% £204 5% £0 0%

Other Income £97 5% £20 0% -£77 -79%

Total £2,131 £4,051 £1,920 90%

3.27. This is principally due to the £1.5m income generated from Enterprise Zone

business rates, and a £319k adjustment to figures reported in 2015/16.

3.28. Growth on the EZ is particularly strong at Markham Vale in Chesterfield and across the Sheffield sites:

2015/16 % 2016/17 % Variance %

EZ Retained Rates £'000 % £'000 % £'000 %

Barnsley £469 22% £494 12% £25 5%

Chesterfield £232 11% £1,132 28% £900 388%

Rotherham £160 8% £186 5% £26 16%

Sheffield £347 16% £912 23% £565 163%

Total £1,208 £2,724 £1,516 125%

3.29. Growth on the EZ is good for the region, since business rates that accrue above a baseline agreed with government flow to the CA/LEP.

3.30. However, reliance on this income stream continues to be an issue when forecasting the income remains difficult. As an example, partners underestimated overall growth on the EZ due to the CA/LEP by £319k during the previous finance year.

3.31. The following charts exemplify that the EZ rates play an increasing role in

resourcing our core budgets:

3.32. 75% of income for core activity in financial year 2016/17 will now come from retained rates, compared to 57% in 2015/16.

3.33. It should be noted that the £319k of adjustments is a one-off windfall due to the under forecast of income in 2015/16. Should funding not grow in future years to match this activity will be reduced to meet the shortfall.

3.34. Other sources of income are largely static, though we anticipate an increase in the income we generate from investing cash before it is required to resource activity.

3.35. Experience from our management of the capital programme in 2015/16, and the increased LGF monies that will flow to us in April 2016, means we expect to hold surplus cash balances for longer. This will enable us to accrue more returns, and reflects the additional income we have generated in 2015/16.

Expenditure Profiles

Core Activity

3.36. Net expenditure for core activity stands at £5,051k in 2016/17. This represents an increase of £3m or 151% on the prior year.

3.37. Of this increase, £1,035k (34%) relates to the Transport Hub (staffing and SEP development).

3.38. Costs can be broken down into teams and cost type.

Cost by Team Costs by Type

3.39. Some revenue costs are capitalised where they fall to do so under proper accounting practice; these costs are then resourced from LGF capital grant. Some costs are also charged into revenue programme activity where they are incurred solely in the course of delivering that activity. Capitalisations and recharges give us the net costs our general resource funds.

3.40. The cost mixes can be shown per business units. Business units within the SCR

Executive broadly mirror the thematic work streams, though several of the teams cover cross-over areas such as performance; policy; operational & management; and SEP development.

3.41. SEP development refers to the costs (£988k) incurred in refining, refreshing, and

ensuring that the Strategic Economic Plan remains relevant and robustly supported by an evidence base.

3.42. Costs incurred include proposed research and development commissions, and

the procurement of external support where there is insufficient capacity or expertise within the SCR Executive.

3.43. These costs are centralised into one core budget to be controlled by a senior

officer. Teams will then bid into this fund to resource activity. This allows for a

centralised control on commissions to ensure strategy development is appropriately shaped.

3.44. It should be noted that the LEP grants received from government are intended to

support this activity. Where possible, we intend to capitalise expenditure incurred solely in the development of the capital programme.

3.45. The operational and management business unit includes the costs of premises

(Broad Street West) and provision for the cost of external meetings (£100k), business support functions provided by SCC and BMBC (£300k), senior management and support staff salaries, along with the costs of supplies and services relating to ICT provision, and other office costs.

FTE Staff Premises Transport

SEP Development

Marketing & Comms

Business Support

Supplies &

Services

Gross Revenue

Exp. Income Capital

Net Revenue

Exp.

£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000

Performance 12.5 684 0 9 0 0 0 0 693 0 449 244

Policy 7.0 373 0 1 0 0 0 0 374 0 57 317

Skills & Employment 12.5 695 0 5 0 0 0 0 700 132 0 568

Transport, Infrastructure & Housing 16.0 845 0 1 0 0 0 0 846 0 145 701

Inward Investment 8.0 428 0 42 0 0 0 296 766 0 0 766

Operational & Management 6.0 260 100 1 0 0 300 232 893 20 50 823

SEP Development 0.0 0 0 0 1,308 0 0 0 1,308 0 320 988

Marketing & Communications 0.0 0 0 0 0 645 0 0 645 0 0 645

Total 62.0 3,285 100 59 1,308 645 300 528 6,224 152 1,021 5,050

Income 0 0 0 0 0 20 132 152

Capital 651 0 0 320 0 0 50 1,021

Net Expenditure 2,634 100 59 988 645 280 346 5,051

FTE Staff Premises Transport

SEP Develop

Marketing & Comms

Business Supp.

Supplies &

Services

Gross Revenue

Exp. Income Capital

Net Revenue

Exp.

Performance 20.2% 20.8% 0.0% 15.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.1% 0.0% 44.0% 4.8%

Policy 11.3% 11.3% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.0% 0.0% 5.6% 6.3%

Skills & Employment 20.2% 21.2% 0.0% 8.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.2% 86.8% 0.0% 11.3%

Transport, Infrastructure & Housing 25.8% 25.7% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13.6% 0.0% 14.2% 13.9%

Inward Investment 12.9% 13.0% 0.0% 71.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 56.1% 12.3% 0.0% 0.0% 15.2%

Operational & Management 9.7% 7.9% 100.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 43.9% 14.3% 13.2% 4.9% 16.3%

SEP Development 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 21.0% 0.0% 31.3% 19.6%

Marketing & Communications 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.4% 0.0% 0.0% 12.8%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

3.46. Though the cost base of the SCR has grown considerably, the cost mixes are largely unchanged, bar a notable increase in marketing and communications:

2015/16 2016/17

3.47. As stated, the costs of marketing and communications have, in particular, increased considerably:

2015/16 2016/17 Variance

Cost Mix (Net Costs) £'000 % £'000 % £'000 %

Staff £827 41% £2,634 52% £1,807 219%

Premises £45 2% £100 2% £55 122%

Transport £64 3% £59 1% -£5 -8%

SEP Development £692 34% £988 20% £296 43%

Marketing & Communications £18 1% £645 13% £627 3483%

Business Support £155 8% £280 6% £125 81%

Supplies & Services £214 11% £346 7% £132 62%

Total £2,015 £5,051 £3,037

*Net costs after capitalisations and programme recharges

3.48. Growth in marketing and communications reflects the relatively low level of activity in the base budget for 2015/16, but also the programming of MIPIM UK and France into future activity. MIPIM activity was requested in financial year 2015/16, and will be funded from underspend or a draw upon reserve.

3.49. Costing of activity from the business plans highlights a new ask for 2016/17 of £400k solely for marketing purposes.

3.50. Other cost growth is largely incremental to the general growth in activity.

3.51. Staffing costs have grown by 110% with a forecast of 62 officers employed by

BMBC on behalf of the SCR Executive. The salaries of these officers are determined by

BMBC pay and grading processes. Some of this officer time will be capitalised, but most

will result in charges to the revenue budget.

3.52. The average cost per officer (including on-costs) for the SCR Executive stands at

£53k. Officers are distributed across the teams as follows:

FTE Staff

Average Cost

£'000 £'000

Performance 12.5 684 £54.7

Policy 7.0 373 £53.2

Skills & Employment 12.5 695 £55.6

Transport, Infrastructure & Housing 16.0 845 £52.8

Inward Investment 8.0 428 £53.6

Operational & Management 6.0 260 £43.3

SEP Development 0.0 0 £0.0

Marketing & Communications 0.0 0 £0.0

Total 62.0* 3,285** £53.0

*not including Growth Hub advisors or AFCOE advisors **figure varies to table at 3.46 due to capitalisations of officer time

3.53. Officer growth largely relates to the rise in the number of officers required to

operationalise the SEP, particularly with respect to ensuring the SCR Executive delivers

through the Assurance Framework.

3.54. In 2015/16 the budget catered for 25 officers. Through that financial year there

has been officer growth as resource has become available from recharges into

programmes (particularly around skills activity) and changes to income. The adoption of

the Transport Hub also brought a further 11 officers to the SCR Executive.

3.55. The structure of the SCR Executive team has previously been agreed with the

Chief Executives through an establishment paper.

3.56. Costs associated with business support and premises rise as the officers those

costs support rise. Additional dedicated officers have been recruited within the CA

finance team to support activity (£130k net), whilst the move to Broad Street West will

result in additional revenue costs as the team moves into larger accommodation.

3.57. SEP development costs have risen, but the majority of this is due to the adoption

of the Transport Hub’s consultancy budget which in 2015/16 stood at £420k p/a.

3.58. The costs of SCR Executive activity is forecast to rise at wage and price inflation

over the coming years. Price inflation remains difficult to forecast in the current climate,

but remains below Bank of England target at 2%. Wage inflation is fixed at 1% per

annum for the next four years. Officers are also entitled to salary increments per BMBC

pay processes. Forecasts suggest that inflation will add c. £100k p/a onto the cost base

p/a.

Programme Activity

3.59. Programme activity is differentiated to core activity because of the way it is

funded.

3.60. Our programme activity is limited by the time we have to deliver that activity and

the funding we are allocated to resource it.

3.61. Funding, in its entirety, comes from grant. Some grant is paid on evidence of

delivery, but some Business Growth activity is funded from the £4m of revenue grant

awarded to the region in 2015/16 as part of the Growth Deal.

3.62. This revenue grant reflected an agreement between the region and government

to ‘swap’ what would have been capital grant into revenue.

3.63. This money allows us to sustain Growth Hub activity and prime other Business

Growth priorities. As this activity is limited by its finite funding, it is reported on as

programme activity.

3.64. Programme activity principally falls on the Business Growth and Skills &

Employment work streams and is forecast to spend at £5,211k. A small scheme relating

to the One Public Estate programme is being run from the Housing Executive Board:

Funding Stream £'000 %

Skills & Employment £3,587 69%

Business Growth £1,534 29%

Housing £90 2%

Total £5,211

3.65. Funding will predominantly come from grant we draw down in year from

government, but also the LGF revenue reserve created from the £4m awarded to the

region in 2015/16:

Funding Stream £'000 %

Specific Grant £4,087 78%

LGF Reserve Draw £1,124 22%

Total £5,211

3.66. The LGF reserve was awarded to the region on the basis that it will solely fund

business growth activity. A plan to expend the reserve focuses on sustaining the

Growth Hub over a four year period, reflecting that initial funding awarded to the region

was for one year only.

3.67. Further calls upon the reserve will be tested through the SCR’s Assurance

Framework and presented for approval.

3.68. At this stage projects are being appraised through this process, so the shape of

the Business Growth programme may change over time.

3.69. The following table highlights the spending areas and funding for all programme

activity. It should be noted that some expenditure includes recharge costs. These costs

occur where the SCR Executive provides services directly for the activity, and is

reimbursed accordingly:

Expenditure Funding Stream

Programme Activity Recharges

Total Expenditure Specific Grant

LGF Reserve Draw

Total Funding

Net Expenditure

2016/17 Programme Activity £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000

Skills & Employment

Skills Bank £232 £81 £313 -£313 £0 -£313 £0

Skills Bank Pilot Residual Activity £269 £0 £269 -£269 £0 -£269 £0

Apprenticeship Grant for Employers £2,930 £0 £2,930 -£2,930 £0 -£2,930 £0

Enterprise Advisor Pilot £75 £0 £75 -£75 £0 -£75 £0

£3,506 £81 £3,587 -£3,587 £0 -£3,587 £0

Business Growth

Start-Up/ESIF Match £117 £0 £117 £0 -£117 -£117 £0

RISE £50 £0 £50 £0 -£50 -£50 £0

Collaborator Portal £95 £0 £95 £0 -£95 -£95 £0

Growth Hub £910 £0 £910 -£410 -£500 -£910 £0

Access to Finance Centre of Expertise £362 £0 £362 £0 -£362 -£362 £0

£1,534 £0 £1,534 -£410 -£1,124 -£1,534 £0

Other

One Public Estate £90 £0 £90 -£90 £0 -£90 £0

Total Programme Activity £5,130 £81 £5,211 -£4,087 -£1,124 -£5,211 £0

3.70. The SCR business plans appropriately detail the activity of the programmes.

4. Implications

i. Financial This report proposes a revenue budget for the year. This budget has resource implications for partners through the subscriptions they pay to support activity. The paper proposes a charging mechanism that means no partner will pay more to the CA than they did in the preceding financial year. The paper proposes a draw on the LGF revenue reserve to support business growth activity.

ii. Legal

iii. Diversity

iv. Equality

REPORT AUTHOR Gareth Sutton POST Finance Manager Officer responsible: Eugene Walker, Section 151 Officer SCR [email protected] Background papers used in the preparation of this report are available for inspection at – N/A Other sources and references: None

1. Issue

1.1. The CA delivers a significant capital programme in support of the Strategic Economic Plan,

which is funded entirely from the Growth Deal allocations.

1.2. The CA also approves, and provides oversight and accountability for the capital programmes of its subsidiary partners. These include the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) and the Local Transport Plan team.

1.3. Complementary to this activity, there are also a number of a capital funds managed by SCC that provide capital resource to support the SEP, including JESSICA and Growing Places Fund.

1.4. This paper provides a high-level snapshot of the proposed capital programme as it

currently stands.

Summary

This paper provides an overview of the current shape of the CA/LEP capital

programme proposals for 2016/17

The programme is characterised by the significant growth (174% increase on

15/16 outturn) on projects managed from the SCR Executive

These proposals do not take account of a potential devolution deal

Further programme proposals are being considered separately to enable us to

produce a broader capital programme should a devolution deal be reached

The programme encompasses each Executive Boards’ business plans

The CA approves an encompassing programme that will be commissioned

through the SCR Executive directly (the direct programme) and also

programmes run by partners who form part of the CA Financial Group (partner

programmes)

These include the following programmes:

o SYPTE capital programme; and,

o Local Transport Partnership (LTP) Integrated Transport Programme.

Approval is also sought for the passporting of Highways Capital Maintenance

grant to South Yorkshire partners.

Partner programmes are currently going through Transport Committee for

endorsement

14th March 2016

CA/LEP CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS

1.5. Of note is the significant growth in the capital programme to be commissioned and managed from the SCR Executive. This is expected to increase by £47.5m or 174% on the 2015/16 programme outturn. This growth relates to additional funding from the Growth Deals (£75m) and also slippage from the 2015/16 programme (£13m).

1.6. Partner programmes are progressing through Transport Committee (TC). TC endorses

and recommends SY transport programmes to the CA for approval, and then manages the programmes in-year on an operational basis.

1.7. The CA ‘direct’ programme is managed directly from the SCR Executive. The CA has

taken on the role of a commissioning body, providing grant and loan support to partner authorities who deliver capital activity.

1.8. At the time of writing, and subject to change as slippage figures become available, the

following capital programme expenditure is proposed:

2016/17

Proposed Area £'000 %

Direct Activity:

Infrastructure £48,124 41%

Transport £10,500 9%

Skills £10,500 9%

Growth £4,700 4%

Corporate £1,021 1%

Sub-total Direct Activity £74,845 63%

Partner Activity:

SYPTE* £22,197 19%

LTP £9,536 8%

Highways Capital Maintenance £11,522 10%

Sub-total Partner Activity £43,255 37%

Total Capital Activity £118,100

*The SYPTE programme is adjusted for funding from the CA (£3m) and Local Transport Plan team (£2.3) to avoid double counting

1.9. A £118m programme represents a £10.4m increase on the planned 2015/16 programme.

However, more significantly, the CA’s direct programme has increased by 86% or £34.6m on the 2015/16 programme (£40.3m):

2015/16 2016/17

Programme Programme Variance

£'000 £'000 £'000 %

Infrastructure £26,634 £48,124 £21,490 81%

Transport £3,300 £10,500 £7,200 218%

Skills £7,500 £10,500 £3,000 40%

Growth £2,500 £4,700 £2,200 88%

Corporate £334 £1,021 £687 206%

Total £40,268 £74,845 £34,577 86%

1.10. The implications of successfully running a programme of this scale are significant when

considered against the forecast outturn for the 2015/16 programme. At the time of writing it was forecast that the 2015/16 programme would underspend by £12.9m, or 32%:

2015/16 2015/16 2015/16

Programme Outturn Variance

£'000 £'000 £'000 %

Infrastructure £26,634 £23,177 -£3,457 13% Underspend

Transport £3,300 £3,300 £0 0% On Target

Skills £7,500 £326 -£7,174 96% Underspend

Growth £2,500 £200 -£2,300 92% Underspend

Corporate £334 £330 -£4 1% Underspend

Total £40,268 £27,333 -£12,935 32% Underspend

1.11. Running a capital programme of this scale and complexity is resource intensive. To

support this, £1,021k of corporate revenue costs (mostly officer time) representing 1% of total expenditure have been taken to the capital programme (£334k 2015/16).

1.12. Expenditure shown above is fully funded with the exception of the LTP scheme which is

over-programmed by £1m. Activity will be trimmed accordingly mid-year to ensure the programme spends to its allocation.

1.13. It is anticipated that a composite Delivery Plan will be produced to align financial and

performance reporting, but this paper represents a finance only paper per instructions from senior officers.

2. Recommendations

2.1. Note that this is a finance only paper without performance narrative, a copy of the SCR business plan is included in Annex A for information;

2.2. Approve the proposed shape of the capital programme;

2.3. Note the significant growth of the programme to be commissioned and managed by the SCR Executive;

2.4. Note that this programme does not take into account potential devolution resource; and,

2.5. Note the capitalisations of costs to support the delivery of the programme.


3.1. Overall Shape

3.2. The CA capital programme includes activity directly run from the SCR Executive, and that run by partners. Some partner activity is approved by the CA; this includes the SYPTE programme and the Local Transport Plan programme.

3.3. Analysis shows that overall, the CA’s programme has increased by £10.4m when compared against the 2015/16 programme approved in March 2015.

3.4. However, this is a net figure that masks a fall in the value of partner programmes by £24m and a growth in the CA’s direct programme by £34.6m:

2015/16 2016/17 Variance

Programme Forecast

Area £'000 % £'000 % £'000 %

Direct Activity:

Infrastructure £26,634 25% £48,124 41% £21,490 81%

Transport £3,300 3% £10,500 9% £7,200 218%

Skills £7,500 7% £10,500 9% £3,000 40%

Growth £2,500 2% £4,700 4% £2,200 88%

Corporate £334 0% £1,021 1% £687 206%

Sub-total Direct Activity £40,268 37% £74,845 63% £34,577 86%

Partner Activity:

SYPTE* £46,233 43% £22,197 19% -£24,036 -52%

LTP £8,640 8% £9,536 8% £896 10% Highways Capital Maintenance £12,568 12% £11,522 10% -£1,046 -8%

Sub-total Partner Activity £67,441 63% £43,255 37% -£24,186 -36%

Total Capital Activity £107,709 £118,100 £10,391 10%

3.5. This table usefully shows that SYPTE’s programme has reduced considerably on the prior year (52% or 41% including the £5.3m LTP and STEP activity adjusted from the total to avoid double counting) as the tail of Major schemes secured before the Growth Deal was agreed are nearing completion, whilst the direct programme has grown by £34.6m.

3.6. The following charts exemplify the change in the mix of the programmes from that approved in March 2015, to that proposed in March 2016.

2015/16 Approved Programme 2016/17 Proposed Programme

3.7. The challenge in delivering the 2016/17 programme is underscored by the growth in the programme when compared against the 2015/16 forecast outturn position:

2015/16 2016/17 Variance

Outturn Forecast

Area £'000 % £'000 % £'000 %

Direct Activity:

Infrastructure £23,177 24% £48,124 41% £24,947 108%

Transport £3,300 3% £10,500 9% £7,200 218%

Skills £326 0% £10,500 9% £10,174 3121%

Growth £200 0% £4,700 4% £4,500 2250%

Corporate £330 0% £1,021 1% £691 209% Sub-total Direct Activity £27,333 29% £74,845 63% £47,512 174%

Partner Activity:

SYPTE* £46,233 49% £22,197 19% -£24,036 -52%

LTP £8,640 9% £9,536 8% £896 10% Highways Capital Maintenance £12,568 13% £11,522 10% -£1,046 -8% Sub-total Partner Activity £67,441 71% £43,255 37% -£24,186 -36%

Total Capital Activity £94,774 £118,100 £23,326 25%

3.8. This highlights that if the CA is to spend to target in 16/17 it will represent a 174% increase in activity delivered from the SCR Executive on the outturn for this year.

3.9. The CA’s Direct Capital Programme

3.10. The CA has taken on a role as a commissioner of capital activity.

3.11. This means that the CA uses its Growth Deal resource to commission partners to deliver schemes which will support the SEP. Partners may then then choose to contract external bodies to deliver the schemes on the ground.

3.12. The CA’s direct capital programme is primarily funded by the Local Growth Fund resource allocated to the region through Growth Deals 1 & 2 with additional specific allocations such as the DfT clean bus fund.

3.13. Growth Deal monies from 2016/17 onwards are indicative and subject to the annual review conversations the Cities and Local Growth Unit of DCLG have put in place to oversee the Growth Deal payments.

3.14. This underscores the importance of the region delivering on its SEP objectives.

3.15. Indicative awards confirmed by DCLG in December are as follows:

3.16. These indicative awards are on top of the £39m of capital grant awarded to the region in 2015/16 which, it is anticipated, will be underspent by c. £12.9m in 2015/16 and the £500k DfT clean bus fund.

3.17. This programme is not contingent on the region receiving devolution monies. Should the region ratify a devolution deal, a further iteration of the capital programme will be brought for approval at a later date.

3.18. The programme can be split across the thematic Executive Boards, and by notional funding stream. All funding falls within the banner of LGF, but is presented to us under allocations of what government notionally believe they are paying for: i.e infrastructure, skills, business growth and so on.

3.19. However, the strength of our Assurance Framework encouraged government to award funding to the region under Section 31 auspices, which affords us significant flexibility to use resource as we see fit without recourse to government for authorisation. This allows us to move funding around the programme to support projects and schemes efficiently where the LEP and the CA believe it is in our best interest to do so.

3.20. This flexibility encourages us to look at the programme resource as one pool of funding that Executive Boards bid into, rather than discreet allocations.

3.21. However, for programming purposes the CA’s direct programme (£75m) can be notionally split across the thematic areas as follows:

2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21

Total £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000

Growth Deals £230,922 £75,122 £78,038 £35,332 £24,215 £18,215

2015/16 2016/17

Programme Programme Variance

£'000 £'000 £'000 %

Infrastructure £26,634 £48,124 £21,490 81%

Transport £3,300 £10,500 £7,200 218%

Skills £7,500 £10,500 £3,000 40%

Growth £2,500 £4,700 £2,200 88%

Corporate £334 £1,021 £687 206%

Total £40,268 £74,845 £34,577 86%

3.22. At this stage, it is apparent that there is no programmed capital expenditure to support the housing work stream. This may change should the region receive devolution monies.

3.23. ‘Corporate’ expenditure relates to the staffing and development costs incurred in the commissioning assurance and delivery of the programme that will be taken to the programme as capital expenditure. This is in line with proper accounting practice, and mitigates pressures that would otherwise fall upon the revenue budget.

3.24. Forward forecasts show that there is significant movement on the programme, with growth peaking in 2016/17, before falling away, projections beyond 16/17 are more indicative as some schemes are yet to be specifically commissioned / appraised:

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 21+

Outturn Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast

Area £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Total

Infrastructure 23,177 48,124 44,409 24,788 34,616 22,656 18,230 216,000

Transport 3,300 10,500 6,000 - - - - 19,800

Skills 326 10,500 6,482 2,500 3,192 5,000 - 28,000

Growth 200 4,700 9,900 10,100 10,900 11,100 5,100 52,000

Corporate 330 1,021 1,031 1,042 1,052 1,062 5,538

Total £27,333 £74,845 £67,822 £38,430 £49,760 £39,818 £23,330 £321,338

3.25. These graphics usefully highlight that at this stage there is no housing capital programme.

3.26. There are large growth movements across the majority of fund headings as Growth Deal monies increase and anticipated slippage from 2015/16 schemes is moved into 2016/17.

3.27. Housing schemes are currently unfunded, reflecting the funding we receive from government.

3.28. Conversely, though we are notionally funded for skills capital activity, the further education area based review impacts upon our ability to spend in confidence, and thus encourages us to withhold committing to schemes until we have a clearer view on provision requirements post review and the profile reflects later than planned delivery.

3.29. Overall, the CA’s direct programme for 2016/17 will be fully funded through grant without recourse to borrowing. This is important in both minimising revenue costs, and also reflecting that the CA currently has no powers to borrow money for its non-South Yorkshire transport activity.

3.30. Over the course of the five year programme the programme is showing as being in surplus by c. £10.9m. This surplus represents programmes for which firm proposals are still to be agreed and accepted into the overall programme.

3.31. Following the first year of operation the programme will be reviewed with all business areas and Partners to provide greater certainty of costs for the 5-year profile, this activity has already commenced for the SCRIF schemes which plan to refresh the scheme profiles taking on board lessons learnt from the first year of operation.

3.32. The indicative profile for the Retained Majors reflects the spend profile of these schemes, as retained funds if the schemes do not proceed then these funds will not be received by the CA.

3.33. Receipts back from JESSICA are also indicative as there may be risk to the timescale and potentially value of this funds being returned to the scheme as planned.

3.34. The following table shows forecast activity across a five-year horizon for the direct programme:

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 21+

Outturn Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast

Area £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Total

Total Expenditure 27,333 74,845 67,822 38,430 49,760 39,818 23,330 321,338

Growth Deals 39,848 75,122 78,038 35,332 24,215 18,215 - 270,770 Retained Majors (indicative profile) - - - 1,100 22,360 2,000 25,600 51,060

DfT Clean Bus Fund - 500 - - - - - 500 JESSICA funding returned - - - - 10,000 - - 10,000 Surplus/-Deficit on Funding 12,515 778 10,216 -1,998 6,814 -19,604 2,270 10,991

Cumulative Surplus/-Deficit

12,515 13,293 23,509 21,511 28,325 8,721 10,991

*Note that the 15/16 programme was over-programmed by £0.4m accounting for the difference between the £12.5m surplus, and £12.9m reported forecast underspend.

Infrastructure

3.35. The infrastructure programme comprises the SCRIF programme, and the EZ accelerator activity.

2016/17

Scheme £'000 %

SCRIF £45,624 95%

EZ Accelerator £2,500 5%

Total £48,124

3.36. The SCRIF programme is the CA’s largest funding programme, targeting infrastructure schemes. A detailed breakdown of the current forecast SCRIF activity is provided as an appendix to this paper.

3.37. All SCRIF activity is funded from Growth Deal 1 & 2 and retained Major Scheme funds, whilst the EZ Accelerator programme was named as a funded activity in Growth Deal 2.

Transport

3.38. The transport element of the programme consists mainly of the Sustainable Transport Exemplar Plan programme (STEP).

3.39. However, provision is also made to refresh transport modelling to ensure it remains Webtag compliant, and passport funding to SYPTE for the Clean Bus Technology project (funded from DfT) and the rail replacement programme funded from Growth Deal 2.

2016/17

Scheme £'000

STEP £8,000 76%

Modelling refresh £1,000 9.5%

Supertram Rail Replacement £1,000 9.5%

Clean Bus Technology £500 5%

Total £10,500

Skills

3.40. The skills programme stands at £10.5m and resources expenditure priorities in the region’s further education sector.

3.41. The skills programme has been amended significantly to take account of the uncertainty surrounding the area based review. This review makes it difficult to determine FE provision in coming years, and therefore investment decisions are largely being withheld until more certainty is available which has affect the likely spend profile.

2016/17

Scheme £'000

High Speed Rail College £6,000 57%

Rotherham College £3,000 29%

Glass Academy £1,500 14%

Total £10,500

3.42. All skills expenditure is funded from Growth Deals 1 & 2.

Business Growth

3.43. The Business Growth capital programme consists solely of the Business Investment Fund workstream (formerly RGF).

3.44. BIF looks to support both inward investment and homogenous growth through the award of capital grant.

3.45. In 2016/17 funding notionally awarded to the BIF programme steps up to expected spend of £4.7m although this equates to allocations of £9.25m which will be defrayed in later years.

Partner Programmes

SYPTE Programme

3.46. The SYPTE programme for the year is currently going through the Transport Committee cycle. The Transport Committee endorse SYPTE’s programme, with it lying for the CA Leaders to approve.

3.47. SYPTE’s full programme and associated attachments is appended to this paper as appendix B.

3.48. The programme stands at £27.5m but includes contributions from other partners. This includes £2.3m from the LTP programme and £3m from the CA (£2m STEP & £1m Rail Replacement).

3.49. This represents a significant reduction of £21.5m on the prior year programme (£49m).

3.50. Expenditure will be incurred as follows, noting that the shape of the programme may change following engagement with the Transport Committee:

3.51. Expenditure is commissioned by SYPTE and will be spent in the following areas:

Item £'000

Barnsley 3,850 14%

Doncaster 5,224 19%

Rotherham 9,349 34%

Sheffield 9,074 33%

Total £27,497

2016/17

Scheme £'000

Tram Train £9,617 35%

Better Bus schemes £5,710 21%

Meadowhall Park & Ride £3,195 12%

Bus Rapid Transit North £2,444 9%

Other £6,531 24%

Total £27,497

Local Transport Programmes

3.52. The Local Transport Programmes consists of the:

LTP: Integrated Transport Block; and,

Highways Capital Maintenance (HCM).

3.53. In prior years the region has also benefitted from LSTF revenue and capital allocations. LSTF revenue funding ends in 2015/16, whilst LSTF capital allocations have now been re-named as the Sustainable Transport Exemplar Plan, and form part of the CA’s direct programme.

3.54. LTP Integrated Transport Block funding is managed by the Local Transport Partnership programme team.

3.55. HCM is received by the CA from Department for Transport but is directly passported from the CA direct to the South Yorkshire districts. The districts retain responsibility for the use of this funding.

Local Transport Partnership: Integrated Transport Block

3.56. The Local Transport Partnership capital programme is funded from the Integrated Transport Block awarded by Department for Transport. This grant has been committed for the three years commencing 2015/16 at £8.4m p/a.

3.57. The full LTP programme and associated papers is appended to this document as appendix C.

3.58. The LTP is over programmed in 2016/17 £1m, reflecting that officers believe that there will be underpsends from 2015/16 to be brought forward:

Item £'000

Expenditure £9,536

ITB Funding Allocation £8,428

Deficit on Funding £1,108

3.59. ITB funding is divided between the districts and SYPTE as follows, with a residual amount retained for county-wide schemes and project management costs:

Area £'000

Sheffield £2,900 30%

SYPTE £2,311 24%

Doncaster £1,500 16%

Rotherham £1,300 14%

Barnsley £1,200 13%

Programme Management £220 2%

County wide Schemes £105 1%

Total £9,536

3.60. The LTP:ITB programme is progressing through the Transport Committee cycle.

Highways Capital Maintenance

3.61. HCM is received by the CA from Department for Transport and distributed immediately to partners based on allocations determined by DfT.

3.62. Though the CA receives and distributes the money, it does not bear responsibility for its use. This is a matter reserved to the individual districts.

3.63. SCC does not receive HCM contributions, instead receiving PFI credits to funds its highways improvement programme: Streets Ahead.

3.64. Receipts from DfT and disbursements in 2016/17 are as follows:

Area £'000

Doncaster £4,630 40%

Barnsley £3,480 30%

Rotherham £3,412 30%

Total £11,522

1. Implications

i. Financial This paper delivers a purely financial view of the proposed CA capital programme for 2016/17. It does not include proposals contingent on a devolution deal. The paper highlights the significant growth in the programme to be managed by the SCR Executive.

ii. Legal

iii. Diversity

iv. Equality

REPORT AUTHOR Gareth Sutton POST CA Finance Manager Officer responsible: Eugene Walker, Section 151 Officer Combined Authority Tel 0114 273 5167 [email protected] Background papers used in the preparation of this report are available for inspection at – N/A Other sources and references: None


Annex A

Sheffield City Region

Executive Delivery Plan:

2016/17

Document Control

No Version description Date File path

1 First version based on Exec Boards draft Business Plans Dec 15

03.01.16

2 Restructure of document to include output definitions and move Exec Board sections to annex

03.02.16

3 Programme Management Addition of Corporate Milestones, outputs and finances – tables still require formatting into word as cut and paste from pdf / excel

03.02.16

4 Removed annexes due to inconsistencies between Exec Board submissions requiring further work

03.02.16

5 Further editing of milestones and outputs table, inclusion of finance tables. Issued to CEX for comment on 11.02.16

04.02.16

6 Completion of first edit of all annexes 09.02.16

7 Cost, Milestone and Output tables updated 17.02.16

8 Business Growth section edits made 19.02.16

9 Updates to spend and funding tables and minor edits

22.02.16

10 Small edits and amends 23.02.16

11 Financial Tables updated 25/02/16

12 SCRIF / STEP programmes added 26/02/16

Contents

1. Introduction

2. SCR benefits, outcomes, outputs and strategic added value

3. The 16/17 Programme (Milestones, outputs and finances)

4. Corporate Organisational Activity

Annexes

1. Business Growth

2. Skills, Employment and Education

3. Economic Infrastructure

4. Transport

5. Housing

6. SCRIF / STEP Programme Profiles

1. Introduction

1.1. What is the Sheffield City Region seeking to achieve?

The Sheffield City Region (SCR) has ambitious plans for economic growth. This

is focused on realising the vision of our Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) of

creating a bigger and stronger private sector. At the heart of this Plan is the

creation of 70,000 jobs in the City Region over the next 10 years. Ultimately,

our Plan is focused on transforming our economy to ensure that the SCR is a

key driver of the Northern Powerhouse.

Since our Plan was produced in 2014 the City Region has successfully

secured £1.25bn of Government funding to help achieve this vision. This

includes a £350m Growth Deal and a £900m proposed Devolution

Deal. Both our Combined Authority (CA) and the Local Enterprise Partnership

(LEP) are focused on the delivery of our SEP and these Deals.

In 16/17 we will continue in our aspirations to secure additional freedoms and

flexibilities and financial settlements. We will innovate in our policy

development driving forward evidence based propositions which accelerate the

local design and management of the programmes which matter to our

businesses and residents. We will commence a detailed evaluation

across our programme, ensuring we and others scrutinise our performance

and programmes in order to evidence to local partners, businesses

and residents of the SCR that the SCR SEP and associated programme is

delivering the economic benefits we aspire to achieve and deliver a

clearly evidenced return on investment.

Alongside this we will continue to review and continuously improve our corporate management functions

and governance. Ensuring across all our work we operate and adhere to a rigorous assurance and appraisal

process, underpinned by excellent financial planning and management and performance management to

deliver the stated outputs and outcomes and to drive continuous improvement.

1.2. The role of this Delivery Plan

This Delivery Plan sets out the activities that the City Region will undertake in 2016/17 to deliver against both

strategic and operational priorities. The aspirations outlined in each section of this Delivery plan will be

operationalised through a number of clearly articulated aims accompanied by a suite of targeted objectives.

Section 2 of this Plan clearly articulates the definition of outputs, outcomes and strategic value we are

seeking to deliver, noting some outputs are defined directly by Government as part of the Growth or

Devolution Deal settlement. As we continue to negotiate our growth and devolution deals this suite of

outputs and outcomes will develop and be further refined.

Within Section 3 of the Plan we clearly articulate the programme we will deliver in 16/17. This will form the

basis of our programme management and monitoring function, as the basis for our LOGOSNET returns to

government, our Scrutiny and Audit functions and to evaluate our progress towards achieving the SEP. It is

structured to identify our 16/17 milestones, 16/17 outputs and outcome delivery profile, and our 16/17

spend. In Section 4 we highlight the cross cutting organisational programme to be delivered in 16/17

including assurance and programme management, marketing and stakeholder engagement and the business

functions of finance, audit, HR, legal and IT.

Finally, to complement the summary of the programme at the corporate level the plan also includes more

detailed annexes for each of our five key thematic areas, business growth; skills education and employment;

economic infrastructure; transport and housing. For each of these five thematic areas the annex is structured

to identify:

Our ambitions for growth;

The strategic activity and investments we will make in 2016/17 to realise these ambitions;

The milestones that we meet to do this; and

The key outputs and outcomes that will be delivered.

These thematic specific annexes have been developed and will be overseen by each of the Executive Board of

the SCR LEP and SCR CA, in accordance with the three pillars of each Executive Boards remit, namely:

Strategy and policy development

Operationalising programme and project investments, and

Performance Management

2. SCR Benefits, Outcomes, Outputs and strategic

added value measures

2.1. Measuring success and monitoring our performance?

On an annual basis the plan will predominantly focus on outputs to be delivered. Whilst recognising as part

of our programme design we will be testing how we measure not simply what we will do (outputs) but the

impact and results of our activity and investments (outcomes and results). As part of the SCR continuing

ambition for devolution of funding and policy responsibilities our ambition is to develop a bespoke list of

outputs and outcomes, relevant to the ambitions of the SCR. Section 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 highlights some of the

indicators we will monitor where we have discretion to develop our own measures.

In addition to these selected outputs, Government have published a full suite of outputs (LOGOSNET

indicators) that should be monitored as part of our LGF, City Deal, Growing Places and Growth Hub

programmes. Whilst not all indicators are relevant to all aspects of our programme each scheme as it

progresses through the appraisal process will be reviewed against the LOGOSNET list to ensure we maximise

reporting of outputs against this Government framework. The LOGOSNET list is included in section 3.2 of this

Plan.

2.1.1. Outputs to be achieved from our investments (what we will do):

Specifically SCR is seeking to capture:

Private investment / leverage – demonstrating SCR investment of public funds levers or recycles

greater amount of other funding.

People assisted with skills – bespoke training or qualifications which delivers a clear outcome for

either the individual or business.

People assisted into work – this involves support into employment for previously inactive,

unemployed, and redundant or workers under threat.

Businesses engaged

Businesses assisted (more intensive support)

Businesses supported with grant funding and other finance eg loans

Brownfield sites / land unlocked

Commercial premises developed

Housing units

2.1.2. Outcomes to be achieved from our investments (what impact will we make):

Further work is progressing to refine and further define the outcomes we are seeking to measure, including

the development of our baseline position and measures of success. Early work with the What Works Centre,

specifically relating to the two national demonstrator pilots SCR Growth Hub and SCR Skills Bank suggests our

outcomes will include:

Improvement in business productivity

Development of new business processes or products

Increase in the number of SCR companies exporting and/or the value of SCR exports

Increase SCR Employment Rate (inc residents based employment)

Reduction in SCR unemployment (inc resident based unemployment and NEETS)

Increase in SCR wages

Progression in work or in learning

Outcome indicators still need to be defined for our Infrastructure, Housing and Transport programmes.

2.1.3. Benefits to be achieved from our investments (the results we want):

The results the SCR are seeking to achieve over a ten year period are defined within the SEP as:

Jobs created – to contribute to the SEP ambition of 70,000 net additional jobs of which 30,000 are in

higher skilled occupations

GVA increase by £3.1bn

New business start-ups – 6,000 new businesses (2014-2023)

Chapter 3, Section 3.2 details our programme outputs and outcomes for 16/17, noting we will seek to

monitor results through the implementation of a longer term evaluation strategy and regular annual

economic reports.

2.2. Strategic Added Value (SAV)

Not all of the work and activity of the SCR Executive will lead to direct outputs or outcomes as described

above, but nevertheless is crucial if we are to develop and implement policy and programmes and to deliver

these utilising effective partnerships delivering increased value and return on investment. This activity is

captured under a number of Strategic Added Value (SAV) measures. SAV will play a central role in the SCR,

making the link between outputs (the things we deliver) and the outcome of these (the effect and impact of

our work).

Whilst ‘outputs define what is delivered by projects or investments to achieve targets and city regional

outcomes, SAV is the added value that is realised by coordinating city regional economic strategy and plans

and influencing others to help achieve its objectives or desired outcomes. The impact of this coordinating

and influencing activity on outcomes can be very significant since it can result in a multitude of organisations

addressing shared prioritised objectives in a coherent and coordinated manner.

It should be noted that SAV has no specific targets, as we have with our formal output framework, but will be

built up from the evidence built into our policy and project design and in the fullness of time may be

captured formally through our programme management framework . SAV will demonstrate how SCR LEP and

CA have delivered outcomes beyond project delivery that will ultimately support the vision, aims, objectives

and priorities of the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP).

This Delivery Plan captures the wider, non-output related added value across three broad SAV categories

a) Strategic catalyst / economic leadership role - encouraging city regional partners and stakeholders

to undertake desirable patterns of behaviour or investment that will contribute to shared objectives

/ support SEP delivery.

b) Contribution to broader policy development or intelligence - undertaking or stimulating activity

which serves to inform and define what needs to be done by different stakeholders in the economy

including individuals and groups, public and private sector in order to promote SEP delivery.

c) Cross-city regional partnership - activities of the above types which also serve to benefit other city

regions for example because:

The risk is so great that it has to be shared across city regions

The target audience spreads across borders

A city regional activity has been so beneficial that it would benefit a wider public (UK,

international regional partnership etc.) to disseminate the information and transfer the

know-how.

3. The 16/17 SCR Programme

3.1. What we will deliver

This section sets out the 16/17 SCR programme. It includes a summary of key strategic milestones across the

programme, the LOGOSNET outputs to be delivered by programme area and any additional outputs SCR will

capture and the indicative programme costs for the directly managed SCR programme and the wider SCR

programme not directly managed by the SCR CA. The information presented in this summary is detailed

more fully in Annexes 1-6.

3.2. 16/17 Programme Milestones

This section details significant programme milestones across all thematic and corporate areas.

Infrastructure Transport Housing Skills Business Growth Corporate

Apr-16

Projects Complete - Grey to Green Phase 1 Projects in construction -M1 J36 Phase 1 -Superfast South Yorkshire Broadband - Universtiy of Sheffield inner ring road phase 1 -Chesterfield Waterside -Syemour link -Colonnades - Waterfront East -Harworth Bircotes -Worksop Vesuvius - BRT North Planned award of funding - Doncaster Civic and Cultural Quarter -Peak Resorts Jessica - Launch of EZ Fund

Northern Transport Strategy Published TfN Strategic Local connectivity scheme options complete Strategic Rail - New Northern and Trans Pennine Franchise starts Determine SYPTE Policy to shape SYPTE business plan Bus Franchising Mandate agreed

One Public Estate Project development commences

Tata Support Service commences Continuation of Grant for Apprentices and Skills Bank

New Business Centre of expertise / SCR Launchpad / RISE offer commences Northern Powerhouse Investment Hub to be launched

Highlight and progress reporting formal processes commence

May-16

Planned award of funding - Claywheels lane - Olympic Legacy Park

A57 Trans Pennine Route Study complete Modelling Mandate Approval SCR rail plan updated

One Public Estate Phase 4 bid preparation

Export ESIF offer commences

Jun-16

Planned award of funding

- SCC Sheaf Business District/SHU Knowledge

Gateway

Key Route network map produced Review of Planning Powers Commences

Skills Capital Competitive Fund revised commissioning framework developed

Second economic bulletin to LEP Publication and presentation of Annual Economic Performance report Annual Governance report produced Formal requests for change process go live


Jul-16

Projects in construction

- Doncaster Civic and Cultural Quarter

-Doncaster Markets

Modelling Outline Business Case Approval SCR Transport Strategy consultation commences Strategic Rail -High Level Output Specification for Control Period 6 Published

One Public Estate Phase 4 bid submission

Skills for Jobs Growth Service commences

Growth Hub Enhancement Programme commences

Aug-16


- SCC Central Business District

- Chesterfield Northern Gateway


- SCC Sheaf Business District/SHU Knowledge

Gateway

- Olympic Legacy Park

Delivering Jobs Programme - Social Enterprise support - service Commences Enterprise Advisor Pilot completes Skills Made Easy Training last intake

launch of Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund

Management of Risk processes go live

Sep-16


- FARRRS Phase 2

Projects Complete

- BRT North

Consultation on Trans Pennine Tunnel Options Complete SCR Transport Strategy Public consultation commences Modelling Full Business Case Approval Key Route consultation with Partners commences Planning Powers Options presented to TEB

North Nott’s – Capital works Complete

Third bulletin to LEP

Oct-16

Projects Complete

- Seymour Link road


-Claywheels lane

-FARRRS Phase 2

-Peak Resorts

TP Tunnel Business Case published HS2 Connectivity discussions with DfT and HS2 complete SCR Transport Strategy presented to TEB for Approval

SCR 5 year Skills Strategy - Published Progress to Work (Big Lottery) ESF - Service commences

Formal scheme evaluation processes


Nov-16


-Chesterfield Northern Gateway

JESSICA - First EZ / SCRIF Investment

Business Case for Bus Franchising - recommendation to TEB / CA to implement the preferred delivery Model SCR Transport Strategy presented to TEB for Approval

One Public Estate Outcome of bids published

Dec-16


- DN7 (Hatfield Link)

- DMBC - St Sepulchre West

SCR Transport Strategy presented to CA for Approval Key Route network map - recommendation to TEB / CA on the proposed key route network and collaboration agreement

Community Innovation Grants Service commences Socially Inclusive Self Employment Service commences

Fourth bulletin to LEP Formal benefit realisation processes go live

Jan-17

Projects in Construction

- DMBC - St Sepulchre West

HS2 - Government Phase 2 announcement due SCR Transport Strategy Published

Progress to Work service commences

Feb-17

Mar-17


- UoS Campus/Inner Ring Road Phase 2

(Brook Hill)

- Upper Don Valley Flood Elevation

-Doncaster -Quality Streets

Projects Complete

- Waterfront

- Olympic Legacy Park

JESSICA - Second SCRIF loan Investment

Strategic Roads MOU with Highways England STEP - Completion of the following schemes -Chesterfield Road / Lower Don Valley Cycle routes / Rotherham Town Centre and Ped access / Sheffield City centre cycle routes / Barnsley J38 cycle routes.

DWP/SCR Pilot commences Grant for Apprentices Complete

£9.5m BIF (RGF) spent (to include at least one inward investment)

MIPIM Web based portfolio management system fully operational

3.3 16/17 Outputs and Outcomes Category Indicator Infrastructure Transport Housing Skills Business

Growth

GVA Additional GVA £3.3m

GVA (Indirect) 5.8m

Jobs / Floor Space

Jobs connected to the intervention 1,400 direct 100 indirect 58 (Construction FTE direct) 1,840 (construction indirect)

344

Commercial floor space constructed (sqm) 23,170

Housing Housing units completed 35

Transport Total length of resurfaced roads (km) 125 metres of new shared surface

Total length of new cycle ways (km) 21,856 metres of new or improved cycle track / lane / or priority measures

Type of infrastructure 13,531 metres of new or improved footways 17 new or improved road crossings 1 new or improved highway junction 1 improved park & ride facility (with 213 additional spaces) 1 new bus / tram gate or priority measure 300 metres of new bus lane 3.3km of renewed tram rail

Follow on investment at site (£, by source)

Other Public Sector £1.7M

Private Sector £27.8M Direct £76.8M Indirect

Business Support, Innovation and Broadband

Number of enterprises receiving non financial support (#, by type of support)

500

Number of new enterprises supported 45

Number of potential entrepreneurs assisted to be enterprise ready 375

Number of enterprises receiving grant support 18

Businesses engaged 500

Businesses supported to export or grow existing 165

Number of Businesses supported 10

Skills Capital Refurbished training/learning facilities (sqm, where FE colleges are involved, by estate grading)

1,635

Skills Apprenticeships 600

Unemployed supported 140

Unemployed sustained employment 313

People Assisted with Skills 6,860

3.3. 16/17 Programme Finances

SCR CA directly manages a breadth of programme budgets including LGF, business growth funding,

devolved AGE grant, ring-fenced BIS funding for Skills Bank management and Enterprise Advisor Pilot

activity. In addition, the SCR Executive is responsible for the co-design and management oversight of other

programmes of activity, which contribute to our wider programme, but for which the SCR CA is not the

budget holder, this includes the City Deal and Youth Contract (SCC accountable body), ESIF (CLG, SFA, DWP

and Big Lottery contract directly to delivery organisation). Tables 1-2 detail the programme the SCR CA

directly manage, table 3 the wider oversight programme (finance not managed directly by the SCR CA.

The Total SCR Funded activity across all policy areas in 16/17 is £80m being;

Capital £74.845m

Revenue £5.2m

This is funded by;

The LGF (1 and 2) Capital Grant allocation for 16/ 17 £75.12m

Likely carry forward from 15/16 LGF Capital Grant of £12.5m

DfT Clean bus fund for 16/17 £500k

Other devolved revenue Grant allocations for 16/17 £4.09m

LGF revenue reserve £1.1m

There is therefore a current capital funding variance of £13.3m. This is however not unallocated funding

and there are a number of additional programming concerns to be considered alongside this variance;

£7.5m of funding is allocated in the LGF profile for Skills Capital and this cannot be allocated until

after the Area Based Review has concluded and the pipeline of schemes have been developed

therefore these project are not included in the 16/17 SCR funded activity but are profiled to

commence in 17/18. This is not a unique position for the Sheffield City Region and discussions with

BIS regarding the profile of this spend are ongoing.

The BIF profile is based on the likely defrayals to 16/17 of £4.9m (cumulative) however it is planned

that investment allocations totalling £9.25m will have been agreed requiring a reserve of £4.35m.

SCR CA Partner funded activity managed by South Yorkshire Local Transport Partnership (LTP) and South

Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) is included in table 3. These programmes have been

endorsed by the SYPTE Executive Board and Transport Committee before including in the SCR Business Plan

for final approval. So as not to duplicate the STEP activity included in the Transport element of the SCR

Funded activity that has not been included in the partner funded activity table although it is Programme

Managed by the LTP team.

Table 1: SCR Capital programme finances 16/17

CA Direct Capital Programme Infrastructure Transport Housing Skills Business Growth

Corporate Total 16/17 new Funds

Likely CF from 15/16

Variance +/- Funds

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000

LGF - Growth Deal 1 Capital 45,624 9,000 - 10,500 4,700 1,021 70,845 71,622 12,515

13,293

Growth Deal 2 (LGF) Capital 2,500 1,000 - - - - 3,500 3,500 -

DfT - clean bus fund - Capital - 500 - - - - 500 500 -

Total 48,124 10,500 - 10,500 4,700 1,021 74,845 75,622 12,515 13,293

NB the SCRIF and STEP programme profiles are included at Annex 6.

Table 2: SCR Revenue programme finances 16/17

CA Direct Revenue Programme

Infrastructure Transport Housing Skills Business Growth

Corporate Total 16/17 new Funds

LGF Reserve Draw

Variance +/- Funds

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000

LGF - Growth Deal 1 Revenue - - - - 1,124 - 1,124 - 1,124

0 Specific Grant - - 90 3,587 410 - 4,087 4,087

- - 90 3,587 1,534 - 5,211 4,087 1,124 0

Table 3: Other SCR programmes 16/17 (not directly managed by SCR CA but part of broader SCR programme)

Partner funded Activity Infrastructure Transport Housing Skills Business Growth Corporate Total

000 000 000 000 000 000 000

City Deal - Revenue - - - 2,600 - - 2,600

Youth contract - Revenue - - - 2,349 - - 2,349

ESF - Revenue - - - 10,975 - - 10,975

De-regulated ASB grant - Revenue - - - 1,500 - - 1,500

LTP - Capital 9,536 9,536

SYPTE - Capital 27,497 27,497

Adjustment for cross partner activity -4,311 -4,311

Total Partner Funding - 32,722 - 17,424 - - 50,146

N.B. LTP Programme over profiled by £1.1M, SYPTE programme currently £248K unfunded, Adjustments for cross partner activity includes - £2M STEP funding reported

in SCR Transport Growth Deal 1 Capital and £2.3M LTP Capital also reported in SYPTE Programme.

4. Corporate and Organisational Priorities

4.1. Our Ambition: what are we trying to achieve?

The SCR’s ambition to secure greater localisation of programmes, policy and responsibility, to shape and

lead the economic fortunes of the City Region, has led to the LEP and CA securing a number of strategically

significant Growth and Devolution Deals with government, many of which are in delivery or will commence

delivery in 16/17. The £330m LGF programme, wider skills and business growth programmes and

preparation for further significant devolution responsibilities including the full devolution of the Adult

Education Budget requires robust business management and corporate supporting governance and

functions.

Specifically in 16/17, the SCR Executive has the following four key and connected aims:

1. To provide leadership in economic policy and act as a catalyst for change through the development

of policy, underpinned with an active economic analysis, research and evaluation programme

outlining the challenges and opportunities across the SCR economy.

2. To contribute to broader policy development and intelligence, raising the profile of the City Region

amongst key stakeholders including businesses, investors, government and national and

international media, in order to implement SEP delivery and results.

3. To operationalise and implement a large and complex strategic programme and project

investments, implementing green book standards in our approach to assurance and value for

money, programme management and ensuring that the SCR secures better outcomes from public

funded programmes and increase the rate of return for every £1 of public money invested.

4. To manage the governance of the organisation in a manner which complies with all requirements

made of public bodies.

In 2016/2017 these aims will be operationalised through the following objectives:

Aim Objectives

1. To manage the governance of the

organisation in a manner which

complies with all requirements made

of public bodies

1. Continue to develop the governance framework of the SCR CA, including:

a. Establishing, implementing and maintaining financial and contractual regulations;

b. Manage the meeting cycle, ensuring papers coming to Boards have followed established approvals procedures and the decision making

requirements laid out in the constitution are adhered to;

c. Produce the annual governance statement for the CA; and

d. Operationalise and further refine the Audit and Scrutiny functions of the CA and LEP.

2. Develop and implement the internal audit plan for the SCR CA, to ensure a high level of compliance to both internal and external audit

requirements, completeness of record keeping, and information is provided in a timely manner.

3. Develop, maintain and review the corporate risk register and risk policy CA

4. Develop and implement a SCR CA operational IT strategy, including protocols for information security

5. Ensure the operating processes for the SCR Exec Team are implemented amongst all staff, including:

HR policies for recruitment, training and development and performance management; and

Training staff to operate in accordance to the legal and policy framework of the SCR CA.

6. Subject to the ratification of the proposed devolution deal provide an enhanced legal function in order to:

Review the SCR CA Constitution;

Establish a Mayoral Combined Authority that could be implemented in 2017/18 within the SCR; and

provide operational legal supports to issue legal documents, contracts, contract variations in support of the growing LGF and devolution

programme.

2. To operationalise and implement a

large and complex strategic

programme and project investments,

implementing green book standards

in our approach to assurance and

value for money

7. To refine and further develop the SCR assurance and accountability framework and associated outcomes and benefit modelling required to

ensure that SCR maintains the highest standards of green book appraisal:

Refine and further develop SCR assurance and accountability framework to take account of new governance arrangements, funding

streams and programme developments, including gain share, housing investment funds, devolution of Adult Education Budget, for

example.

Commission, refine and develop new appraisal methods and modelling techniques to map the benefits of investment and provide the

Exec Boards and CA / LEP assurance in relation to investment decisions.

8. To adopt the highest standards of programme management across all aspects of the spend programme, and running an efficient programme

approval process combining the functions of analysis, programme management, procurement, finance and legal support, specifically:

Establish formal processes for:

a. Highlight and Progress reporting;

b. Requests for Change;

c. Management of Risk;

d. Scheme Evaluation; and

e. Benefit Realisation.

Introduction of a web based programme / portfolio Management System to allow top down and bottom up monitoring and reporting of

Project / Programme / Portfolio. To capture and formally report the processes identified above and report against the SEP objectives.

9. To manage performance across the SCR CA through the developing and implementing of the performance management reporting system across

all business areas including to:

Produce theme specific dashboards to support the decision making and performance management processes of each of the SCR Exec

Boards. (Data collection and process development).

Support internal operational projects / programmes including establishing a dashboard / dashboards for activities outside the five core

themes.

Report performance in a timely manner to government via the LOGOSNET return, ensuring returns are accurate and timely.

10. Develop the SCR economic evidence base for devolution and growth deals and support the evidence underpinning detailed business cases in

support of future devolution policy propositions.

11. Lead a programme of bespoke research, supporting the development of the SCR evidence base, criteria and principles to support devolution and

LGF policy propositions, including the development of evaluation mechanisms for gain share

3. To provide economic policy leadership

and act as a catalyst for change through

the development of policy, underpinned

by an active economic analysis, research

and evaluation programme outlining the

challenges and opportunities across the

SCR economy.

12. Production of information and analysis, providing high quality intelligence, to inform SCR and partner policies and priorities, specifically:

Production of quarterly economic bulletin reports on key themes affecting areas economy. For example trade and investment, labour market,

business performance and housing (predominantly based on publically available data).

Production of an annual report on the performance of the City Region’s economy and forecast future levels of growth across the City Region.

The publication of this work would be designed to align to the proposed annual business summit in the City Region and would supplement

other information of what City Region projects are themselves delivering.

13. Commission SCR CA evaluation approach, including monitoring economic benefits and returns of investment and social inclusion indicators.

4. Contribute to broader policy

development and intelligence, raising

the profile of the SCR amongst key

stakeholders including businesses,

investors, government and national and

international media, in order to

implement SEP delivery and results.

14. Develop integrated marketing and communications strategies for the City Region

Develop a Corporate Communications Strategy for SCR to include short-medium term plans for corporate communications and resources,

develop longer term marketing and communication plans for the City Region and resources needed and develop the evidence base for

future work including implications of the proposed devolution deal.

Develop the SCR Marketing Communications strategy, including further development of the corporate brand and work to ensure brand

consistency across organisation touchpoints. Leading branding work ensuring consistency across programmes including Skills Bank, Growth

Hub and transport. Branding the new office and other assets.

Develop internal Executive Team and partner communications and briefings, including the LEP Board (V-Room).

15. To develop the Digital Communications of the LEP and the CA, including building a new website to reflect the current organisation’s projects and

mission, development of a full digital/web strategy and development of corporate social media plans.

16. Managing Media relations and monitoring, including developing a media strategy and plan, managing reactive and proactive corporate

communications and managing high profile / sensitive communications projects including HS2.

17. To lead an active communications campaign and develop an annual programme of business events, including for example:

MIPIM UK and France

Programme launches including the Integrated Infrastructure Plan launch and the Skills Summit

Invest in SCR Conference

Horasis 2017

18. Lead and develop communications work resulting from the Mayoral consultation programme

Annex 1: Business Growth

Our Ambition: what are we trying to achieve?

The Independent Economic Review undertaken to develop the SEP highlighted some significant

challenges in the structure, shape and size of the private sector within the SCR, namely that we had too

few businesses, too few businesses exporting and bringing in new investment to the SCR and that we

needed new and existing businesses to move up the value chain in order to deliver higher skilled

employment opportunities. This challenge was at the heart of the vision of the SEP to create a stronger

and bigger private sector by supporting the growth of indigenous businesses, supporting new businesses

to start up, growing SCR businesses ability to trade and increasing inward investment into the SCR.

We also set out evidence of “a nationally recognised weakness relating to the growth of established local

SMEs, due to a latent demand for business support.” This latent demand or absence of external support

acts as a drag on the SCR’s economic performance. The purpose of the Business Growth strand of the

LEP/CA Delivery Plan, articulated through a number of strategic and operational aims and measurable

objectives, is to address this latent demand for external support in order to increase the size, density and

productivity of our business-base.

Aims of our Programme

1. To develop an outward facing economic and business policy approach which is close to the voice

of business and is based on a deep understanding of the city region’s business base, its needs and

opportunities. Our aim is to work closely with local and national policy-makers to design bespoke

programmes of support to help businesses grow and be a voice of business at regional and

national level whilst also ensuring a strong business voice in the development of our policy and

programmes.

2. We will operationalise and deliver a programme of activity across a wide range of business areas

to:

a. deliver a fully operational Growth Hub and associated Centres of Expertise, and

b. operate a targeted inward investment programme to attract new investment and

businesses to the city region as well as working with existing foreign owned companies in

the city region to grow their presence locally.

Our strategic and operational objectives in 2016/17

Aim Objectives

To develop an outward facing

economic and business policy

approach which is close to the

voice of business and is based

on a deep understanding of the

city region’s business base, its

needs and opportunities.

1) Ensure national and sub-national policy and delivery programmes meet the needs of the Sheffield City Region. Including

a) Ensuring that the development of new programmes at the SCR level reflect the national business support ecosystem and the changes underway with the closure of the

Business Growth Service

b) Making a leading contribution to shaping the pan-northern “Northern Powerhouse Investment Taskforce and the Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund.

c) Ensuring that national programmes, such as those delivered around Trade and Investment by UKTI reflect the needs and opportunities of the Sheffield City Region.

2) Development of strong business relationships; a trusted partner.

a) We will work with the LEP Chair, Deputy Chair and key business employer representative bodies, including the Institute of Directors, CBI, SCR Chambers, FSB and sector

and other local network groups to inform the development of our economic and business policy, exploit new opportunities and tackle emerging issues.

3) A strong evidence base underpinning policy and programme development.

a) We will undertake a series of SCR business surveys

b) Commission research and intelligence, including focusing on developing an SCR wide understanding of the export base

c) Undertake a Science and Innovation Audit in partnership with the Department for Business Innovation and Skills and develop the evidence base to inform an SCR Smart

Specialisation Strategy.

4) Develop a programme of capital and revenue programmes focusing on supporting the business base to grow and enhancing the city regions physical innovation assets.

Including:

a) Developing an SCR Export Programme for delivery through the Growth Hub

b) Developing an SCR Innovation Programme

c) SCR Enterprise and Entrepreneurial programme

d) Exploring the potential for some sector specific programmes

e) Support and champion the development of major innovation capital schemes in the city region, focusing on those that support the emerging Advanced Manufacturing

Innovation District concept

Operationalise and deliver a

fully operational Growth Hub

and associated Centres of

Expertise

5) Official launch of the SCR Growth Hub providing signposting and intensive advice to businesses in 2016/17 with specific programmes of support launched with:

a) An SCR Launchpad programme to support new businesses

b) A joint SCR / UKTI export support programme

c) deliver a suite of financial incentives, supporting over 100 businesses to access the right package of finance to support their growth plans

d) Alignment of the Skills Bank with Growth Hub advisors.

Operate a targeted inward

investment and aftercare

programme to maximise

conversion of inward

investment propositions and

grow on activity from

established foreign owned

investors

6) SCR will seek to support and incentivise inward investment and re-investment, in order to grow jobs, bring in new businesses, develop supply chain and maximise SCRs

economic strengths. Specifically we will:

a) Work with UKTI and Northern LEPS to establish the Northern Powerhouse

b) support 16 new businesses from national and international markets into the Sheffield City Region – creating £86m of additional GVA

c) Create and attract 3,000 new jobs into the SCR in 16/17

d) Develop and implement a programme to support existing foreign owned companies expand in the SCR leading to additional jobs and net new investment.

Delivering our objectives in 2016/17

To contribute to realising these objectives we propose to:

Work with the Business Growth Board and the advisory sub-boards to

o monitor progress in delivering business support services and achievement against our

performance measures.

o develop and shape the technical and operational aspects of our Business Growth Programme,

including the Inward Investment Advisory Group, the Innovation Centre of Expertise and New

Business Partnership.

o Align the work of the Skills Bank with the Growth Hub

Provide strong SCR leadership on the development of the Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund

Continue to work with BIS, UKTI, CLOG and HMT in the development of strands of our devolved

programme and to further the national and international partnerships required to deliver our

programme.

Continue to develop strategic partnerships with key organisations such as, Centre for Cities and the

What Works Centre to support SCR detailed strategic analysis, evaluation and programme development.

Develop a more detailed understanding of our business base by delivering in partnership with the SCR

Chambers of Commerce a quarterly SCR business survey and lead a programme of business events that

promote the key messages.

Work with partners across the city region on the development of transformational capital projects, for

example supporting the work of any schemes emerging from the Advanced Manufacturing District.

Annex 2: Skills, Employment and Education


SCRs ambition is to secure greater economic prosperity for its residents and businesses. To achieve this we

recognise the imperative for SCR to accelerate both the rate and pace of change, namely the priority to

increase labour market participation, grow employment, grow high value vocational skills, inspire enthusiasm

and a desire for lifelong learning and progression and create a dynamic and responsive support

infrastructure, with shared ownership across stakeholders, to deliver the change required.

Operationalising this vision is summarised through two key aims which will underpin the skills, employment

and education business plan of the SCR CA and LEP between 2015 and 2018:

1. To develop the strategic vision and policy for SCR through the development of an SCR Skills and

Employment Strategy that will take the shape of a 5 year plan and programme in which we will be

held accountable to Government and which will be the responsibility of the SCR to deploy.

2. To operationalise and implement a range of strategic programme and project investments to secure

better outcomes from public funded programmes and increase the rate of return for every £1 of

public money invested.

Our Strategic and Operational Objectives 2016/17

Aim Objectives

1. To develop the strategic vision and policy for SCR through the development of a five year SCR Skills and Employment Strategy (2016-2021) and programme in which we will be held accountable to Government and which will be the responsibility of the SCR to deploy.

1. Finalise the negotiations and development of the detailed business cases for all areas of the SCR devolution submission, identifying the contribution to outcomes and

benefits of localisation of programmes. Specifically:

a. Implement the first annual cycle of local outcome based commissioning for the Unified Adult Education Budget; measuring impact of delivery against SCR skills

priorities in academic year 2016/17, alongside an annual timetable of labour market and College performance reviews in order to inform curriculum planning and

College allocations for academic year 2017/18

b. Co-commissioning of the Work and Health Programme with DWP, influencing all elements of the process from service design to performance management by Summer

2016 with on-going participation in procurement and implementation throughout 2016/17, and to secure Ministerial approval by autumn 2016 for an SCR pilot to

support the harder-to-help

c. To agree and implement an SCR Apprenticeship strategy by summer 2016 in order to manage the transition in proposed national reforms and maximise Apprenticeship

growth in SCR, including submission of a business case by April 2016 to secure funding from the SCR gainshare pot in support of this strategy

d. To agree and implement an SCR Careers strategy by summer 2016 in order to create a more coherent offer of careers activity across the city region in order to create

an evidence base for future devolution asks in this field, including submission of a business case by April 2016 to secure funding from the SCR gainshare pot in support

of this strategy

2. Working with key stakeholders and partners to conclude the Area Based Review in the timescales established (Sept 2015-April 2016) including development and

submission of a proposal to Government to secure re-structuring funds in support of ABR recommendations across the city region.

3. To develop and oversee the implementation of ABR recommendations through agreed SCR governance established by summer 2016. This will include holding key

stakeholders accountable to recommendations made by the review including educational institutions e.g. Colleges, Regional Schools Commissioner, Ofsted and Local

Authorities.

4. The SCR CA also proposes to include an ABR recommendation for a full review of all 16-18 and 19+ curriculum to be commissioned by summer 2016 alongside the

implementation of wider ABR recommendations. This will be used to inform a 16-18 FE education and skills plan developed by autumn 2016, Local Authority plans for

school sixth forms, on-going devolution of the Unified Adult Education Budget and to influence specialisation investments made in the city region e.g. skills capital.

5. Lead the development of the SCR baseline of indicators, and following the development of the devolution business cases and the Area Based Review, commence the

development, consultation and production of a collaborative SCR Skills and Employment Strategy (2016-2021) by autumn 2016.

6. Utilising data and evidence from existing programmes, strategic business cases and our 2016-2021 strategy we will put forward a further case to Government by

December 2016 for greater powers and devolution, with a focus on asks in careers, 16-18 education and employment programmes.

7. In support of this objective we will facilitate a collaboration across the northern powerhouse in order to harness the collective power of city regions in achieving this goal.

8. To develop an ESIF commissioning strategy by autumn 2016 for programmes commencing in 2017/18 and 2018/19.

2. To operationalise and implement a range of strategic programme and project investments to secure better outcomes from public funded programmes and increase the rate of return for every £1 of public money invested.

9. To deliver jobs growth in the SCR through:

a. Continuing to grow new apprenticeship growth through the Skills Made Easy programme (600 Apprentices) and through a newly designed Apprenticeship

strategy should investment be secured through the SCR gainshare pot.

b. Incentivising new employers to establish apprenticeship job vacancies through the deployment of financial incentives, including the Grant for Apprenticeships,

seeking to deploy £2.9m grants in 2016/17.

10. To support SCR residents into employment through development of a range of employment support projects, including:

a. Continued delivery of Ambition SCR, seeking to support 327 young people into work during 2016/17;

b. Launch of the Skills for Jobs Growth service by summer 2016, a programme ensuring SCR residents recently unemployed are linked with a recruiting employer and

supported back into employment.

c. Supporting RMBC in the deployment of £1.5m of funds to support the re-training of staff affected by TATA redundancies, including affected staff within local supply

chains throughout 2016/17

d. Launch of the Progress to Work service (via the Big Lottery) for the hardest to help, a programme ensuring SCR residents are supported through key worker and

training to access employment opportunities.

e. Launch of Community Innovation Grants and Self Employment programmes by January 2017, which will collectively support 140 on their journey into work and self –

employment

f. Development of Work and Health pilot and alignment of ESF funds (in development), co-design and commissioning of the future Work and Health Programme.

11. To support businesses within the SCR to develop the skills they require in their workforce, and to increase co-investment in training through an SCR programme supporting

skills which respond to business needs:

a. Continued delivery of accredited training to businesses responding to the Skills Made Easy offer, including delivery of training and Apprenticeships to 2,400 individuals

and leveraging private sector investment;

b. Operationalisation of the SCR Skills Bank, as a centre of excellence for the wider SCR Growth Hub Service, to assist 4,260 support employees with the skills they need

to progress in the workplace, levering c £2M private investment in skills development across the City Region.

12. To ensure SCR has the training infrastructure required to support the immediate needs of business and learners in line with SEP priorities in addition to development of

the future infrastructure required to realise SEP growth objectives:

a. Operationalise skills capital programme, commencing delivery of a range of schemes including North Nottingham College and the National Rail College – Doncaster

Campus.

b. Bringing forward a range of schemes for approval in 2016 including (subject to assurance and appraisal) Rotherham Higher Skills Centre

c. Develop a Skills Capital Commissioning Strategy by summer 2016, taking into account ABR recommendations and potential development of one or more Institutes of

Technology.



Continue to operate the stakeholder Working Groups reporting into the Skills Employment and Education Executive Board to continue to

develop detailed business cases for all aspects of the current devolution deal

Put in place an SCR Strategic Advisory Panel, of national skills and employment experts, to challenge and shape the development of our 5 year

Skills and Employment Strategy and collaborate more effectively with other operational teams across the Northern Powerhouse area.

Continue to work with DWP, CLOG and HMT in the co-commissioning of the Work and Health Programme, including alignment of ESF and pilot

programmes supporting the harder to help, drawing in experts to work with us to shape our programme.

Continue to develop strategic partnerships with key organisations such as Gatsby Foundation , Centre for Cities and the What Works Centre to

support SCR detailed strategic analysis

We will review and progress a new arrangement for the FE secondee

We will explore the option of the SCR CA becoming a co-financing organisation for the second part of the ESF programme.

Annex 3: Economic Infrastructure


Infrastructure investment is essential to deliver the outcomes of our SEP. By ensuring that the City Region

invests in the right schemes, the SCR will be able to create the right jobs in the right locations. Achieving this

ambition requires co-ordinated integrated activity between the Infrastructure, housing and transport

thematic areas.

Through the £50m infrastructure programme in 16/17, as part of our wider multi-year £255m programme of

investment, we are seeking to bring forward schemes that will when operational:

Realise £50M GVA growth;

Create the infrastructure to support 2,955 jobs, including 1,529 construction jobs;

Unlock 35 new homes;

Create 35,200 (sqm) in commercial floorspace; and

Leverage £88m in private sector funding

We will do this through two key and related aims:

1. The development of an infrastructure investment pipeline to ensure that the City Region can deliver

the right growth in the right places, including commissioning key interventions through our

Integrated Infrastructure Plan and other related documents including for flood and energy.

2. The continued delivery of our investment programme including the SCR Investment Fund (SCRIF),

the SCR JESSICA and the SCR Enterprise Zone Fund.

Our strategic and operational objectives in 2016/17

Aim Objectives

1. The development of an

infrastructure investment pipeline

to ensure that the City Region can

deliver the right growth in the right

places, including commissioning key

interventions through our

Integrated Infrastructure Plan and

other related documents including

for flood and energy.

1. To be the first area in the country, outside London, to have an Integrated Infrastructure Plan (IIP) and commissioning framework in

place. Through the IIP the City Region will develop the pipeline of schemes to ensure delivery beyond 2016/17 and current

commitments. Specifically the SCR will:

Launch the IIP in June.

Develop a prioritised programme of infrastructure investments, based on the Plan by September 2016. Current benchmarking

indicates this could have a potential value of c£1.5bn.

This prioritised programme will be used to inform future SCR funding bids (i.e. further rounds of LGF) and existing resources such as

gainshare (subject to the ratification of the existing Deal).

2. Develop Energy and Flood Strategies for the City Region that will set out the approach to these issues, how opportunities surrounding

them can be maximised and challenges minimised, in a sustainable manner.

2. The continued delivery of our

investment programme including

the SCR Investment Fund (SCRIF),

the SCR JESSICA and the SCR

Enterprise Zone Fund.

3. We will continue to deliver our multi-year programme of SCRIF schemes ensuring the profiled spend of £53.5m is delivered by March

2017, specifically we will:

Enter into funding agreements for twenty infrastructure projects by April 2017,

Ensure five projects are complete by March 2017,

4. We will further develop and grow our existing SCR Property Investment Fund to a total value £45m to unlock commercial

development in the City Region. Specifically this will include:

Monitor and manage the delivery of our existing c£30m JESSICA / GPF fund;

Identify investment for the additional £10m of funding made available to SCR JESSICA / GPF and launched in 2015/16; and

Create and launch the Enterprise Zone Fund of £5m to develop the property offer of ready to occupy sites across our Zone.

5. Maximise the potential of our Enterprise Zone (EZ) – to:

Develop to operational readiness the SCR EZ Accelerator fund (as part of the property investment fund)

Work to maximise development and business growth on EZ sites.

Lead on the development of new EZ sites within SCR and EZ policy for potential future bidding rounds.



Continue to operate the stakeholder Working Groups reporting into the Infrastructure Executive

Board to develop and shape the technical and operational aspects of our Programme, including the

JESSICA Investment Board, Enterprise Zone Board and the Infrastructure Development Group.

Continue to work with Government Departments including DCLG and DCMS and other agencies

such as BDUK and the Environment Agency to accelerate key City Region priorities including

broadband and our Enterprise Zone.

Continue to develop strategic partnerships with key organisations such as Centre for Cities and the

What Works Centre to support detailed strategic analysis, including monitoring and evaluation of

existing interventions.

Continue to lead local and City Region intelligence and research on different elements of

infrastructure e.g. energy. This will include building strategic relationships with key stakeholder

such as major utilities companies.

Annex 4: Transport


Transport is a key enabler of jobs and growth. The SCR ambition is to have a transport network that

facilitates sustainable and inclusive economic growth. The SCR transport activity constitutes a diverse set

of actions linked to a transformative and unprecedented time in the transport sector. This business plan

includes our work shaping and influencing national scale transport strategies through to ensuring that

local people can benefit from the opportunities created.

Through the £10.5m capital transport investment programme 16/17 we are seeking to:

Re-surface 125m of roads;

Deliver 21,860m of new or improved cycle track / lane priority measures; and

13,500 metres of new or improved footpaths; and

300 metres of new bus lanes;

17 new or improved road crossings;

3.3km renewed tram track;

1 new bus / tram gate or priority measure;

1 improved highways junction; and

1 improved park and ride facility.

We will do this through three key and related aims:

1. Extract maximum value and benefit to the SCR from its external links, improving connectivity to

other key City Regions. This includes active participation and influence over national and pan

regional strategic programmes and investments such as through Transport for the North and High

Speed Two.

2. We will plan for a connected transport system fit for the 21st century that improves internal

connectivity within the Sheffield City Region.

3. We will continue to deploy investment in schemes and programmes including through the

Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP), clean bus fund and rail replacement

intervention.


Aim Objectives

1. Extract maximum value

and benefit to the SCR

from its external links,

improving connectivity to

other key City Regions.

1. Shaping the policy and investment strategy of Transport for the North, specifically:

Seeking to influence and resource the delivery of the Northern Transport Strategy (2016), to ensure that the SCR priorities are reflected

in the TfN priorities to gain the maximum amount of available funding.

Developing and shaping of multi-model connectivity enhancements propositions across the North, such that investments benefit our

economy.

Identifying and sponsoring a major TfN workstream as part of a revised TfN governance arrangements.

Being the Accountable Body for TfN, until TfN becomes a statutory body in 2017.

2. Influencing the development of High Speed Rail strategic planning and implementation, specifically:

Inputting into the development of the HS2 East, ensuring the eastern leg of the HS2 route is strongly supported by partners along the

route

Further planning and development of connectivity packages connecting urban centres and key growth locations throughout the Sheffield

City Region, including to the Central Business District

Negotiating our requirements to inform the HS2 Hybrid Bill preparation, to ensure that this meets the City Region’s requirements.

3. Engage with Rail North Ltd in the development of a Strategic Rail Plan that sets out our ambitions for rail in the SCR. This includes investment

on the Midland Mainline, East Coast Mainline and Trans Pennine routes

4. Agree Memorandums of Understanding with Highways Agency and Network Rail that set out an approach to their work and operations

within the SCR.

2. We will plan for a

connected transport

system fit for the 21st

century that improves

internal connectivity

within the Sheffield City

Region.

5. Subject to the ratification of our proposed devolution Deal the SCR will seek to secure a locally designed transportation system, specifically:

Bus Franchising: the SCR will explore options to meet its aspirations of the provision of bus services in the City Region to determine the

optimum approach to deliver this network. This will include understanding the relative costs and benefits associated with moving to a

franchise model when compared with partnership arrangements. This analysis should be undertaken in light of the type of bus network

and service provision that the City Region is seeking to achieve.

Lead the work on the development of the consolidation and devolved transport budget and ensure that this is managed accordingly.

Identify a Key Route Network of local authority roads that will be collaboratively managed and maintained at a City Region level.

Working with Government and other city regions seek to identify mechanisms to reform the Transport and Works Act Powers to

accelerate the timescales for the delivery of key schemes, particularly if these powers were devolved to City Regions.

6. SCR Transport Strategy and Vision Development

Refreshing the SCR Transport Strategy to reflect recent opportunities, joining together other transport workstreams with a common

vision for improving connectivity

Through the refreshed Transport Strategy set policy direction that reflects the changing transport environment in terms of governance

and funding.

Set the policy direction for SYPTE to shape its Business Plan and budget.

7. We will seek to further negotiate and secure funding and flexibilities from Government to invest in low emissions vehicles and infrastructure

3. We will continue to

deploy investment in

schemes and

programmes including

through the Sustainable

Transport Exemplar

Programme (STEP), clean

bus fund and rail

replacement

intervention.

8. Delivering the Sustainable Transport Programme to enhance sustainable travel options in SCR and meet wider Government objectives,

aligning investment in capital and revenue activity and deploying c£8m in capital investment in schemes across SCR (subject to assurance and

appraisal), which will deliver the transport outputs detailed above

9. Deliver the £500,000 programme of investment to retrofit 25 buses to reduce their emissions and continue to work to secure further funding

and flexibility from Government to invest in low emission vehicles and infrastructure. Principally this will be delivered through an Office of

Low Emission Vehicles funding competition and further devolution negotiations.

10. Invest £1m in Supertram Renewal in 2016/17 to renew 3.3km of track, as part of the wider programme of investment in the network.



Continue to operate the stakeholder Working Groups reporting into the Transport Executive Board

to develop and shape the technical and operational aspects of our programme, including the HS2

Board

Continue to actively engage and explore funding opportunities with HS2 Ltd, Department for

Transport, Transport for the North, Network Rail and Highways England.

Investigating opportunities though devolution to deliver a targeted cycling action plan and public

transport action plan

Continue to lead local and city region intelligence and research on future transport strategy.

Annex 5: Housing


Housing is a major factor in the growth of any economy. SCR is seeking to influence national policy and co-

design programmes and policy and deploy investment to deliver our SEP ambition of building 70,000 - 100,000

additional homes in the SCR over 10 years.

We will do this through two key and related aims:

1. Develop a strategic plan for housing in the City Region, which sets our future direction in terms of the

residential offer that the SCR is seeking to create, including a prioritised programme of proposed

investment.

2. Subject to securing investment deliver a prioritised programme of housing schemes in the City Region.

3. Make better use of publicly owned land and assets and increase planning capacity to increase housing

delivery and commercial development in the SCR.

Through progressing the above objectives we will examine how we address the challenges in housing delivery in

the SCR and create practical and innovative solutions to achieve our ambition to increase housing delivery.


Aim Objectives

1. Develop a strategic plan

for housing in the City

Region, which sets our

future direction in terms

of the residential offer

that the SCR is seeking to

create, including a

prioritised programme of

proposed investment.

1. Undertake a strategic assessment of current and desired housing projections to inform the development of a strategic Housing Plan for the SCR

that specifically:

Lead on market intelligence through undertaking a Housing Demand Assessment enabling the SCR to develop a consistent methodology

and framework for the collection of data for future SCR Housing Market Assessments, particularly understanding customer need

Monitor the preparedness of potential housing sites to ensure that a pipeline of sites is developed and investment priorities shaped

accordingly.

Capitalise on public sector funding and design innovative approaches to funding housing developments.

2. Develop a cohesive investment and marketing strategy to attract housebuilding activity in the SCR

2. We will develop and

operationalise a housing

delivery programme for

to be implemented and

commence delivery in

2016/17.

3. We will seek to develop the Housing Investment Fund (HIF) a revolving low interest loan fund to provide finance to projects facing a viability

gap.

4. Subject to available funding, we will develop a Housing Delivery Programme pipeline of schemes / projects capable of delivering housing

starts/completions within the financial year 16/17.

3. Make better use of

publicly owned land and

assets and increase

planning capacity to

increase housing delivery

and commercial

development in the SCR.

5. Influencing strategic planning in the SCR, subject to ratification and approval of our proposed devolution deal, we will:

Develop a spatial planning framework for managing planning across the SCR.

Following the development of this framework the SCR will consider and subsequently develop any supplementary planning documents

that may be required.

Explore the case for where Mayoral Development Corporations could be created in the City Region to , support delivery on strategic

sites.

6. We will collaborate across SCR to make better use of assets and to accelerate land disposals, specifically through the development and

operation of the SCR Joint Assets Board to:

Develop the SCR Asset Management Plan, a coordinated approach to managing assets across the SCR. Developing common operating

principles for a more efficient and effective public sector.

Collaborate on One Public Estate Phase 3 in order to utilise public sector land and property assets to create economic growth, provide

more integrated and customer-focused services, generate capital receipts and reduce running costs.


To contribute to realising these objectives we propose to;

Continue to operate the SCR Housing Directors Group and consider how to collaborate and resource

housing activity across SCR.

Work with Government and other public bodies to ensure the Joint Asset Board is a success

Continue to explore and discuss funding opportunities for additional support for One Public Estate

Investigating opportunities though devolution to develop and deliver a HIF

Continue to lead local and city region intelligence and research on mechanisms to increase housing

delivery.

Annex 6: SCRIF AND STEP POGRAMME PROFILES

SHEFFIELD CITY REGION INVESTMENT FUND (SCRIF)

Scheme 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/2020 2020/2021 2021 onwards Total SCRIF

M1 Junction 36 TOTAL £1,000,000 £8,807,750 £213,000 £727,500 £7,076,858 £5,206,967 £- £23,032,075

M1 Junction 36 - Hoyland Phase 1 £1,000,000 £8,661,750 £50,000 £727,500 £4,076,858 £1,191,967 £15,708,075

M1 Junction 36 - Goldthorpe Phase 2 £146,000 £163,000 £3,000,000 £4,015,000 £7,324,000

Superfast Broadband £714,570 £4,009,417 £3,490,583 £2,400,000 £10,614,570

Sheffield City Centre TOTAL £2,720,000 £3,050,000 £9,948,000 £4,129,000 £- £- £- £19,847,000

Central Business District/Moor/NRQ £250,000 £3,814,000 £1,129,000 £128,491 £5,321,491

Sheaf Business District/SHU Knowledge Gateway

£- £- £3,815,000 £- £3,815,000

UoS Campus/Inner Ring Road - Phase 1 £290,000 £2,600,000 £2,890,000

UoS Campus/Inner Ring Road - Phase 2 (Brook Hill)

£200,000 £2,319,000 £3,000,000 £5,519,000

Riverside Business District - Grey to Green Phase 1

£2,430,000 £2,430,000

Upper Don Valley TOTAL £- £2,313,697 £6,070,697 £3,718,606 £2,000,000 £1,500,000 £- £15,603,000

Parkwood Springs £3,757,000 £3,218,606 £6,975,606

Claywheels Lane £2,313,697 £2,313,697 £4,627,394

Upper Don Valley Flood Elevation £500,000 £2,000,000 £1,500,000 £4,000,000

Chesterfield Waterside £- £2,700,000 £2,700,000

DN7 (Hatfield Link) £1,875,000 £7,670,000 £3,000,000 -£1,390,000 £11,155,000

Seymour Link £3,780,000 £3,780,000

FARRRS Phase 2 £7,100,000 £2,000,000 £9,100,000

Chesterfield Northern Gateway £86,830 £3,649,952 £1,783,112 £310,106 £5,830,000

M1 Junction 37 Claycliffe Link £19,970 £700,000 £11,088,030 £11,808,000

Scheme 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/2020 2020/2021 2021 onwards Total SCRIF

West Moor Link £300,000 £8,950,000 £9,250,000

Doncaster Urban Centre TOTAL £830,000 £7,073,000 £8,187,000 £6,900,000 £900,000 £- £- £23,890,000

Civic and Cultural Quarter £635,000 £635,000

Colonnades £80,000 £2,200,000 £2,280,000

Doncaster Market £1,500,000 £500,000 £2,000,000

Quality Streets £1,250,000 £100,000 £1,350,000

St Sepulchre West £2,100,000 £2,200,000 £2,900,000 £900,000 £8,100,000

Waterfront - East £750,000 £750,000

Waterfront - West £3,600,000 £3,900,000 £7,500,000

Lakeside £638,000 £637,000 £1,275,000

Waverley Lower Don Valley TOTAL £- £- £- £1,100,000 £20,712,000 £20,949,000 £8,268,000 £51,029,000

Waverley Lower Don Valley A630 £15,012,000 £18,949,000 £8,268,000 £42,229,000

Waverley Lower Don Valley Link Road £1,100,000 £5,700,000 £2,000,000 £8,800,000

Harworth Bircotes £- £455,000 £495,000 £950,000

Worksop Vesuvius £117,000 £383,000 £185,000 £730,000 £357,500 £1,125,000 £2,897,500

Peak Resorts £2,850,000 £2,850,000

Olympic Legacy Park £- £4,900,000 £4,900,000

BRT North £4,015,000 £4,015,000

Urban Development fund loan £10,000,000 -£5,000,000 -£5,000,000 £-

TOTAL £23,176,570 £45,623,664 £41,909,232 £24,788,218 £34,616,464 £22,655,967 £20,481,030 £213,251,145

NB Profile is as extracted from Q3 highlight reports not approved budgets, Programme total allocation is £211m and scheme funding to be managed

within this total allocation.

2016/17 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT EXEMPLAR PROGRAMME (STEP)

LTP REF

SCHEME TITLE STEP THEME LEAD PARTNE

R

AREA BASELINE 2016/17

ALLOCATIONS

DESCRIPTION / NOTES

BS06 J38 to Town Centre Cycle Route

Integrated Networks

BMBC B £861,978 Link between J38 of the M1 to Barnsley town centre, including the creation of carriageway cycle lanes for the full length and patching of the existing carriageway where required.

DS03 Trans Pennine Trail Enhancements (Doncaster)

Integrated Networks

DMBC D £600,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 STEP. Upgrading of the Trans Pennine Trail between Doncaster and the Dearne Valley.

DS04 Doncaster Town Centre Cycle Enhancements

Integrated Networks

DMBC D £350,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 STEP. The initiative addresses the gaps in the Doncaster cycling network and focuses, primarily, on connections between Doncaster town centre, Doncaster Greenways and the Trans Pennine Trail.

RS02 Cycle Routes Lower Don Valley (Rotherham)

Integrated Networks

RMBC R-S £450,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. Improvements to the main Rotherham to Sheffield off road cycle route, including significant works to the canal towpath cycle route around New York Stadium, and provision of direct access into Rotherham town centre.

RS03 Rotherham Town Centre Cycle & Pedestrian Access

Integrated Networks

RMBC R £765,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. Improved pedestrian and cyclist connection improvements, including the introduction of major pedestrian / cycle and public realm corridor improvements from Eastwood, Masbrough and Ferham areas on the eastern and western edge of the town centre to improve access to employment, public transport interchanges, retail and training in the centre.

SS03 Lower Don Valley Cycle Route

Integrated Networks

SCC S £610,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. New cycle infrastructure to connect existing and planned strategic routes through the Lower Don Valley growth area.

SS04 Upper Don Valley Cycle Route

Integrated Networks

SCC B-S £350,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. New cycle infrastructure to connect existing and planned strategic routes through the Upper Don Valley

SS06 Sheffield City Centre Cycle Routes

Integrated Networks

SCC S £496,590 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. New cycle infrastructure to improve cycling in the city centre and connect the existing and planned strategic routes through the Lower and Upper Don Valleys.

SS07 Blackburn Valley Cycle Route

Integrated Networks

SCC S £140,000 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. New cycle infrastructure to complete the strategic route from Meadowhall to Tankersley.

SS08 South Sheffield Route

Integrated Networks

SCC S £250,000 New cycling and walking routes linking Sheaf Valley and Gleadless Valley with Graves Park and "National Centre for Sports and Exercise Medicine" (NCSEM).

PS02 Meadowhall Car Park Extension

Integrated Networks

SYPTE R-S £1,450,838 Project deferred from the 2015/16 programme. Provision of additional capacity with a decked car park at the existing Meadowhall Park and Ride, providing an additional 213 spaces increasing the total up to 542.

LTP REF

SCHEME TITLE STEP THEME LEAD PARTNE

R

AREA BASELINE 2016/17

ALLOCATIONS

DESCRIPTION / NOTES

PS04 Bus Key Route Sheffield - Chesterfield Road / Heeley Bottom

Targeted Corridor Enhancements

SYPTE S £549,162 Continuation of project in the 2015/16 programme. One of the projects of Sheffield Better Bus Area chosen to address the problems related with congestion and delays to bus services along this key route in Sheffield. It involves the creation of two continuous inbound lanes by widening Chesterfield Road (fronting Porcelanso, B&M and Lidl), providing a peak hour bus lane and a lane for general traffic - outside weekday peak hours all traffic would be allowed to use both lanes.

OVERALL STEP TOTAL £6,873,568 Total 2016/17 allocation = £8,000,000. The programme is, therefore, currently £1,126,432 under programme (16.4%).

The balance of the overall programme will be met by schemes started in 15/16 completing in 16/17, therefore it is expected that full spend will be

achieved in year.

11 February 2016

16/17 Estimated Cost Committe

d Y/N (2)

LTP BBA Unfunded DfT Reserves STEP Other SCPF EFC Forecast

Completion Date

Stage

(at 01/04/2016)

Description

BRT North £2,444,348 Y £75,000 £2,369,348 £34,376,167 30/09/2016 Implementation Rotherham-Meadowhall-

City Centre including link

road to unlock

development land at

Tinsley

Rotherham Interchange Repairs £1,430,000 Y £1,430,000 £4,185,939 26/12/2017 Detail Design Capital maintenance

works to the interchange

and car park and

refurbishment to the

interior and exterior of the

interchange and car park.

Note that the car park is

reaching a critical level in

terms of maintenance

requirements.

Rotherham Interchange

Redevelopment

£500,000 Y £500,000 £25,000,000 01/12/2018 Feasibility Demolition of the

interchange and car park

and redevelopment of site

(will be either this scheme

or one above, not both)

Supertram Rail Replacement £1,095,000 Y £95,000 £1,000,000 £16,250,644 30/08/2015 Implementation Retentions

Supertram Rail Replacement

Phase II

£0 Y £13,500,000 30/08/2019 Detail Design New phase to replace

remaining rails - note

projected costs including

SYSL costs £22,000,000

Tram Train - SAV £9,617,152 Y £9,617,152 £50,949,541 30/05/2016 Implementation Extension to Tram service

to Parkgate and more

vehicles to improve

frequency of existing

services.

Park & Ride - Meadowhall

Extension

£3,194,838 Y £40,000 £1,450,838 £1,704,000 £5,003,641 30/06/2017 Detail Design Extension to park and ride

facilities at Meadowhall

Station. STEP funding for

the project has been

secured. A SCPF bid has

been submitted and

awaiting the outcome of

the bid.

Parkgate - Major £250,000 N £150,000 £100,000 £4,272,542 12/05/2017 Feasibility New link road from

Aldwarke Lane into Retail

World to provide

alternative access to the

A633 thus reliving the

demand on the congested

route.

Large Schemes

Annex B DRAFT 2016/17 Capital Budget

Summary of Schemes, Costs, Funding and EFC's for schemes in 2016/17 Capital Budget

BBA - Audio Visual Displays on

Vehicles (AV)

£139,678 Y £139,678 £143,850 31/12/2016 Feasibility Audio announcements on

buses trial on service 120

Halfway to Fulwood via

city centre 40 buses

BBA - Improvements to use of

UTC facilities

£98,134 Y £98,134 £340,595 31/12/2017 Implementation Operators reps in UTC

room enabling rapid

response to incidents and

accidents on the Sheffield

network.

BBA - Key Route - Chesterfield

Road/ Heeley Bottom

£2,486,812 Y £1,937,650 £549,162 £3,667,527 31/03/2017 Detail Design Bus priority/bus lane to

improve punctuality,

reliability and journey

times

BBA - Key Route Bus - Sheffield -

Gleadless (B6388)

£355,226 Y £355,226 £1,969,226 31/03/2017 Implementation Bus priority/bus lane to



times

BBA - KR A61 Penistone Road £0 Y £0 £1,224,307 31/03/2015 Implementation Bus priority/bus lane -

post implementation

works

BBA - North Sheffield II £2,189,468 Y £2,189,468 £2,930,373 30/03/2017 Detail Design Barnsley Road to

Northern General bus

priority

BBA - Real Time Information

Displays at Stops (RTI)

£46,559 Y £46,559 £46,559 31/03/2017 Conception Real time at prioritised

stops

BBA - Sheffield City Centre £394,457 Y £394,457 £465,959 31/03/2017 Detail Design Priority for clusters of late

running buses linked to

real time system

Key Route Bus - Barnsley -

Wakefield A61 Phase II

£125,000 N £125,000 £2,870,000 16/06/2019 Feasibility Old Mill Lane bridge

widening and Smithies

Lane and Scorahs

junction improvements to

complete the Key Bus

Route to improve

reliability, punctuality and

journey times and

congestion for all traffic.

Key Route Bus - Rotherham

Dearne Phase II

£500,000 Y £0 £500,000 £1,415,000 14/11/2018 Detail Design Completion of the

Rotherham Dearne KBR

along A633 including

Taylors Lane localised

widening and

consideration of dualling

from St Anne's

Roundabout to B&Q

signals and widening on

the pinch point railway

bridge to the north of

Retail World.

Bus Partnership & Related Schemes

KR Bus Barnsley - Doncaster

North via Thurnscoe Phase 2

£83,000 N £0 £83,000 £303,000 31/03/2017 Feasibility Completion of KBR along

the A635 from Barnsley to

Doncaster via Thurnscoe

interventions previously

carried out include those

to improve punctuality,


times and customer

satisfaction with new

shelters and level bus

boarding.

A6195 Dearne Valley Parkway

Public Transport Schemes

£25,000 N £25,000 £40,000 31/03/2016 Conception Bus priority/bus lane to



times

Hotspots Programme - Barnsley £50,000 N £50,000 £50,000 31/03/2017 Feasibility Minor improvements to

address bus punctuality

and reliability issues.

Hotspots Programme - Doncaster £50,000 N £50,000 £50,000 31/03/2017 Feasibility Minor improvements to



Hotspots Programme -

Rotherham

£50,000 Y £50,000 £50,000 31/03/2017 Feasibility Minor improvements to



Hotspots Programme - Sheffield £506,694 Y £0 £506,694 £506,694 31/03/2017 Feasibility Minor improvements to



Sprotbrough Road Improvement

Scheme

£25,000 N £25,000 £89,000 31/03/2017 Detail Design Minor intervention to

provide additional

capacity at the St Mary's

gyratory to assist

punctuality and reliability

of buses.

BSOG Devolvement (Devolution

Deal)

£50,000 Y £50,000 TBC Conception Preparation of BBA type

projects across SY in

readiness for the outcome

of the Devolution Deal

work streams.

Smart Ticketing £250,000 Y £250,000 Feasibility /

Detail Design

Progress toward an

'Oyster' type smart card.

(WP's at differing stages

of development)

Smart Ticketing - WP29 -

Retailing Improvements (1)

£150,000 Details of specification

being developed in Q4,

2015/16.


Advanced Ticketing (Retailing)(1)



2015/16.

Smart Ticketing - WP31 - CRM/

Integration (Design) (Devolution

Deal Work)(1)

£1,200,000 Details of specification


2015/16.

Smart Ticketing - WP51n - Near

Field Communication phone

app(1)



2015/16.

Devolution Deal & Related Schemes

Smart Ticketing - WP60 - Smart

Reimbursement(1)



2015/16.


Reverse Journey Matching(1)



2015/16.


Hotlisting(1)



2015/16.

Smart Ticketing - WP66 - Cross

Selling(1)



2015/16.

Smart Ticketing - WP84 - NFC

Integration(1)



2015/16.


Yorcard Data Links(1)



2015/16.

Tram Network Works £50,000 N £50,000 £20,000,000 29/12/2023 Feasibility Preparation for

refranchising, life cycle

works and related

activities.

Preparation of Schemes 2017-

2021

£0 N £0 £0 31/03/2017 Conception Preparation of schemes

for future years.

Potential BRT

Barnsley/Doncaster (North or

South)

£0 N £0 Conception BRT project via either the

Dearne north or south to

provide a viable high

quality public transport

offer in the absence of a

heavy rail link.

Potential BRT Linking Tesco P&R

to Barnsley

£0 N £0 Conception Link road from the P&R

site to bypass Stairfoot

Roundabout pinchpoint

Waverley (was BRT South) £20,000 N £20,000 TBC 31/03/2018 Conception Public transport

intervention to the

proposed development at

Waverley

New Stops on Tram / Train Trial £45,000 N £45,000 £12,000,000 31/03/2020 Conception Improved access to the

tram train along Tinsley

and other employment

areas. Exact number of

stops and scope of works

still to be agreed

Doncaster Station Forecourt

(feasibility)

£100,000 N £100,000 TBC TBC Feasibility Accessibility

improvements to

Doncaster Station aimed

at minimising conflicts

between, pedestrians,

cyclists and vehicular

traffic as well as the

severance caused by

Trafford Way.

Preparation for Implementation in Future Years

RHADS Rail Station £0 N TBC TBC Feasibility Time to work with DMBC

and Network Rail and

developer.

Doncaster Interchange Access &

Egress

£0 N TBC TBC Feasibility Time to investigate

options to mitigate against

delays accessing and

egressing the Interchange

onto Trafford Way

A18 Doncaster Bus Priority £25,000 N £25,000 TBC 31/03/2018 Conception Bus priority to improve

punctuality, reliability and

journey times.

Sheffield Rotherham Economic

Corridor

£50,000 N £50,000 Conception Mass transit solution to

the AMP and Waverley

and internal traffic

movements across the

corridor.

A630 dualling Warmsworth £25,000 N £25,000 TBC TBC Conception Bus priority/bus lane to



times

Westmoor Link / Thorne Road

dualling

£50,000 N £50,000 TBC 31/03/2018 Feasibility Dual carriageway

between Wheatley Hall

Road and Westmoor link

and removal of rail over

road pinchpoint to aid bus

punctuality, reliability and

journey time for all

vehicles.

Rotherham Rail Station

(Parkgate)

£200,000 N £200,000 £45,000,000 01/12/2020 Feasibility New rail station at

Parkgate (£15-20M) with

tram train line extension

(£25M). Note cost

includes new tram and

sub station. Optimism

bias of 30% applied to

station and 66% to tram

works.

Barnsley Interchange £150,000 Y £150,000 £25,673,283 30/06/2016 Post Implementation Retentions from original

build

Minor Projects Package £92,000 Y £92,000 £92,000 31/03/2017 Implementation Concept stage projects for

future years.

Programme Wide Costs £374,000 Y £374,000 £374,000 31/03/2017 Implementation

Tram Stops Upgrade £0 N £1,437,334 20/07/2015 Implementation Retentions for real time

displays

Office for Low Emission Vehicles

(OLEV)

£0 Y £0 £3,322,000 Implementation Bid for low emission

vehicles. Grant may not

come through PTE

accounts.

Clean Bus Technology Fund £500,000 Y £500,000 £500,000

Others

Park & Ride - Conisbrough

Extension

£50,000 Y £50,000 £414,000 31/03/2018 Conception Provision of park and ride

facilities ( extension to

existing car park) at

Conisbrough Station. A

SCPF bid has been

submitted and awaiting

the outcome of the bid.

Park & Ride - Kirk Sandall £5,000 Y £5,000 £7,000 31/12/2016 Detail Design Extension of park and ride

provision and other

improvements to car park

mainly developer funded.

Park & Ride - Penistone Rail

Station

£0 N £1,030,065 31/10/2017 Feasibility

Wheels to Work £65,000 N £65,000 Implementation Capital investment in new

scooters for loaning to

people with a job or

training offer they can't

access by public transport

Customer Strategy (non BAU) £40,000 N £40,000 Capital elements of the

customer strategy to

encourage people to self

serve.

CT Vehicles £200,000 Y £200,000 £200,000 31/03/2017 Conception New community transport

vehicles to replace time

expired .

£27,497,366 £2,311,000 £5,667,866 £248,000 £9,617,152 £1,430,000 £2,000,000 £4,519,348 £1,704,000

NOTES

STEP - Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme

Other - Includes bids in progress, Clean Bus Technology Fund.

SCPF - Station Commercial Project Facility

EFC - Estimated Final Cost

(2) Level of commitment Red Y = contractually committed or Health & Safety requirement. Amber Y = other level of commitment (eg funding bid made). N = scheme could be terminated with no direct financial impact

(2) IT block grant approx 10% over programme. Schemes highlighted in yellow might be affected as a result of this, suspension / reduced scope in 2016/17.

(3) For projects at early stages of development, it is not possible to quote EFC / completion date - TBC

(4) Schemes with £0 in 16/17 estimated cost will have resource implications.

LTP - IT Block Grant

BBA - Better Bus Area

Unfunded - Source of funding yet to be confirmed.

DfT - Funding directly from DfT

Reserves - PTE reserves

(1) Funding to be developed in 2016/17

Annex C BASELINE 2016/17 LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN (LTP) CAPITAL PROGRAMME

LTP REF SCHEME TITLE LTP STRATEGIC INVESTMENT THEMELEAD

PARTNERAREA

BASELINE 2016/17

ALLOCATIONSDESCRIPTION / NOTES

BMBC Programme

B041 BMBC Local Accident Schemes Designing and Maintaining Safe Roads BMBC B £130,000Package of work to include schemes to address safe routes to school, KSI hotspots, school safety zones,

implementation of speed management action plan, deployment of speed indicator devices.

B042 BMBC Sustainable Travel Active Travel BMBC B £335,000Package of works including Barnsley Bus Partnership, Stairfoot Roundabout improvements, dropped kerb

crossing / pedestrian routes, new footways and minor works / monitoring.

B043 BMBC Traffic Management Selective Investment in the Strategic Network BMBC B £375,000Package of traffic management improvements, including direction signing, CCTV improvements Barugh

Green crossroads Mova update and Dearne Valley Parkway (Goldthorpe) VMS.

B045 BMBC Cycling Package Active Travel BMBC B £50,000Cycle interventions selected from the Borough Council's prioritised list to improve both access and facilities and,

thereby, encourage increased active travel.B046 BMBC Scheme Design Selective Investment in the Strategic Network BMBC B £310,000 Costs associated with development of major schemes.

£1,200,000

DMBC Programme

D035 DMBC Safer Roads Designing and Maintaining Safe Roads DMBC D £300,000Package of improvements, including Safer Communities, School reduced speed limits, A630 Conisbrough Safety

Measures and targetted casualty reduction measures.

D036 DMBC Sustainable Choices Active Travel DMBC D £450,000Footpath improvements and minor works including dropped crossings / pedestrian routes, footway improvements,

Travelwise Commuter Plan, Doncaster Bus Partnership and minor works / monitoring.

D037 DMBC Traffic Management Selective Investment in the Strategic Network DMBC D £280,000To design, consult and implement measures that improve the efficiency of the highway network and make it inclusive

for all travel modes, including direction signage, CCTV Parrots Corner and Cleveland Street Roundabout improvements.

D038 Major Scheme Costs Selective Investment in the Strategic Network DMBC D £400,000 Costs associated with development of major schemes, including FARRRS and West Moor Link.D039 DMBC Cycling Package Active Travel DMBC D £70,000 Package of cycling improvements and minor works including road crossings, cycle parking and cycle lanes.

£1,500,000

RMBC Programme

R030 Rotherham Safer Roads Designing and Maintaining Safe Roads RMBC R £350,000 Targeted expenditure at identified accident hotspots and routes.

R031 Rotherham Better Connectivity Active Travel RMBC R £450,000

A programme of schemes intended to improve connectivity and encourage walking and cycling including multiple

improvements to pedestrian crossings and facilities; B6060 Morthen Road / Northfield Lane crossings; A6109 Wilton

Gardens Toucan crossing; and improvement to key cycle network.

R033 Rotherham Smarter Choices Programme Active Travel RMBC R £50,000A package of measures aimed at increasing use of Active Travel modes using supported travel plans and cycle parking,

especially in employment areas where there are known issues.

R034 Rotherham Traffic Management Selective Investment in the Strategic Network RMBC R £450,000

To design, consult and implement measures that improve the efficiency of the highway network and make it inclusive

for all travel modes. Elements include Main Street / Westgate banned turn; A630 Doncaster Road Dalton, capacity

improvements and bus priority; A630 Fitzwilliam Road bus stop improvements and pedestrian access; Optimisation of

traffic signals; Minor amendments to traffic signs and road markings; and UTC.

£1,300,000

SCC Programme

S075 Sheffield Accident Savings Programme Safer Roads for Children and Young People SCC S £385,000Package of measures including Forbes Road amended controlled crossing; RSA4 and scheme completion;

Early action on fatal sites, ensuring early decision on how to progress.

S077 Sheffield Bus Rapid Transit North ContributionPublic Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSCC S £560,000

Contribution to Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project, improved access to economic regneration area including

reducing congestion and improving journey times on other local routes

S085 Sheffield Bus Agreement (incl Hotspots) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SCC S £25,000 Package of measures in support of the Sheffield Bus Partnership.

S086 SCC Other Cycling Projects Active Travel SCC S £90,000 Programme of projects to support and encourage cycling.

S087 City Wide 20mph Speed Limit Development Designing and Maintaining Safe Roads SCC S £400,000 Programme of road safety improvements, icluding at Woodhouse, Greystones, Firth Park and Meadowhead

S091SCC Streets Ahead Accessibility Opportunities

(small schemes)Core Network Management Processes SCC S £400,000

Redesigning road layouts and piggybacking PFI work to implement changes in "one go". Common small

scale interventions include reducing street clutter, new dropped crossings, handrails and lining.

S094 Action for Pedestrians Programme Active Travel SCC S £100,000 Improving surfaces (principally on bridleways) to improve facilities for pedestrains and cyclists

S095 SCC Network Management Programme Selective Investment in the Strategic Network SCC S £520,000

Known hotspots on key strategic routes that have been included in a (now approved) mandate for a two-year

project to reduce congestion and delays by improving journey time reliability and smoothing traffic flows,

including A57 Parkway (inbound); A57 Moss Way - Coisley Hill - Eckington Way; A57 Broomhill Corridor; and

A6135 Barnsley Road - A6102 Fir Vale.

S097SCC Streets Ahead Accessibility

Enhancements (large schemes)Active Travel SCC S £320,000

A range of interventions primarily aimed at pedestrians and safety to encourage more walking and a safer

environment.

S098 SCC Streets Ahead Cycling Enhancements Active Travel SCC S £100,000

Series of smaller schemes being delivered in paralell with the PFI project to improve cycling options. For

example, opening up 'no through roads' to cyclists. Also providing resocurces to ensure cycling is considered

in all schemes within the capital programme.

£2,900,000

SYPTE Programme

P003 CT Vehicle replacement Programme Better Public Transport Connectivity SYPTE B-D-R-S £205,000 New community transport vehicles to replace time expired

P038 Bus Rapid Transit Phase 1b - Northern RoutePublic Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE R-S £100,000 Rotherham-Meadowhall-City Centre including link road to unlock development land at Tinsley

P052 Tram Train - SAVPublic Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE S £25,000 Extension to Parkgate and more vehicles to improve frequency of existing services.

P057Rotherham Car Park

Better Public Transport Connectivity SYPTE R £25,000Capital maintenance works to the car park and refurbishment to the interior and exterior of the car park. Note

that the car park is reaching a critical level in terms of maintenance requirements.

P059Park & Ride - Meadowhall Extension Prep

CostsPublic Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE S £55,000 SCPF bid to extend parking at M'hall.

P063 Key Route Bus Doncaster - Thorne Rd Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE D £50,000Dual carriageway between Wheatley Hall Road and Westmor link and removal of rail over road pinchpoint to

aid bus punctuality, reliability and journey time for all vehicles.

P067 SYPTE Minor Projects PackagePublic Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE B-D-R-S £58,500 Support for smaller scheme.

P068 South Yorkshire Hotspots Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B-D-R-S £150,000 Minor improvements to address bus punctuality and reliability issues.

P073 Supertram Rail Replacement Phase I & II Strategic Network / Severance Schemes SYPTE S £150,000 Retentions and new phase to replace remaining rails

P078Key Route Bus - Barnsley to Wakefield Phase

IIPublic Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B £125,000

Old Mill Lane bridge widening and Smithies Lane and Scorahs junction improvements to complete the Key

Bus Route to improve reliability, punctuality and journey times and congestion for all traffic.

P079 Smart Ticketing Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B-D-R-S £306,000 Delivery of Smart Ticketing

P084 Tram Network Works Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE S £61,500 Lifecycle works and preparation for re-franchising

P085 LSTF - Tram Stops - Upgrading Retention Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE S £2,000 Post implementation activities

P086 Doncaster Station Forecourt (feasibility) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE D £111,500Accessibility improvementsto Doncaster Station aimed at minimising conflicts between, pedestrians, cyclists

and vehicular traffic as well as the severance caused by Trafford Way.

P087 A18 Doncaster Bus Priority (feasibility) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE D £25,000 Bus priority/bus lane to improve punctuality, reliability and journey times

P088 A630 Warmsworth Dualling Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE D £25,000 Bus priority/bus lane to improve punctuality, reliability and journey times

P094A6195 Dearne Valley Parkway Public

Transport Study (feasibility)Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B £25,000 Bus priority/bus lane to improve punctuality, reliability and journey times

P098 Sheffield Rotherham Economic CorridorPublic Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE R-S £61,500 Mass transit solution to the AMP and Waverley and internal traffic movements across the corridor.

P099 Preparation of Schemes 2017-2021Public Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE B-D-R-S £15,000 Costs associated with development of next round of PT major schemes.

P100Parkgate (new link road Aldwark Rd to Stadium

Way)

Public Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE R £190,000

New link road from Aldwarke Lane into Retail World to provide alternative access to the A633 thus reliving

the demand on the congested route.

New Sprotborough Road Improvement SchemePublic Transport Infrastructure to Unlock

Sustainable RegenerationSYPTE D £25,000 Minor intervention to provide additional capacity at the St. Mary's gyratory to assist punctuality and reliability.

New OLEVEvaluation of Air Quality, Emissions and Noise

SYPTE B-D-R-S £15,000 Delivery of SCR bid

New BSOG Devolvement (Devolution Deal) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B-D-R-S £61,500 Preparation of BBA type projects across SY in readiness for the Devolution Deal.

New Waverley (was BRT South) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE R-S £25,000 Public transport intervention to the proposed development at Waverley

New New Stops on Tram / Train Trial Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE R-S £57,000 Improved access to the tram train along Tinsley and other emplyment areas.

New Rotherham Rail Station (Parkgate) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE R £250,000 New rail station at Parkgate on tram train line

New Park & Ride - Conisbrough Extension Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE D £61,500 SCPF bid to extend parking at Conisbrough

New Park & Ride - Kirk Sandall Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE D £7,000 Extension of park and ride provision and other improvements to car park mainly developer funded.

New Park & Ride - Penistone Rail Station Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B £2,000 Extension of exisiting Park & Ride.

New Customer Strategy (non BAU) Public Transport System to Link People to Jobs SYPTE B-D-R-S £41,000 Delivery of capital elements of Customer Strategy work

£2,311,000

Countywide (Air Quality / Network Management Allocations)

AQ002 Air Quality Monitoring Evaluation of Air Quality, Emissions and Noise RMBC B-D-R-S £25,000

This countywide scheme involves roadside monitoring of air quality pollutants associated with transport

emissions. The monitoring contributes directly to the LTP air quality indicator LTP2-06a, and assesses

changes in air pollution concentrations as a result of LTP interventions to reduce emissions.

AQ003 Air Quality Modelling Evaluation of Air Quality, Emissions and Noise RMBC B-D-R-S £25,000

This countywide scheme involves roadside modelling of air quality pollutants associated with transport

emissions, along with the greenhouse gase carbon dioxide. South Yorkshire local authorities use a shared

"Airviro" system for modelling emissions (and how these are dispersed) from road transport, and has a very

detailed transport related emissions related database which covers the entire South Yorkshire area. The

system has the capability of modelling how emissions from road transport are affected by schemes and

interventions and how this will affect the concentration of air pollutants in South Yorkshire. The four councils

work very closely on this project.

CN024Annual Cordon Counts / Vehicle Occupancy

SurveysCore Network Management Processes SYPTE B-D-R-S £55,000

Costs of undertaking the annual Cordon Count / Vehicle Occupancy Surveys (VOS). Surveys are undertaken

at each suvey location on one day (07:00 to 19:00), per year. Information is collated on total number of

people travelling, by mode, into and out of the four town / city centres. Ensures continuity of a dataset going

back around 30 years into trends of modal share.

N.B. Allocation provisionally included in the programme pending further discussions about the suitability and

longevity of resourcing the activity through this source.

£105,000

LTP Programme Management

SY004 SYLTP Central Team Programme Management SYLTP B-D-R-S £220,000 Continuation of programme management for the range of partnership programmes.

£220,000

OVERALL PROGRAMME

£9,536,000Total 2016/17 settlement = £8,428,000.

The programme is, therefore, currently £1,108,000 over programme (13.1%).

BMBC Current Programme Total

DMBC Current Programme Total

OVERALL LTP CAPITAL PROGRAMME TOTAL

SYPTE Current Programme Total

RMBC Current Programme Total

SCC Current Programme Total

SYLTP Current Programme Total

Countywide Current Programme Total

1. Issue

1.1. This report provides an update on the SCR IIP

2. Recommendations

2.1. Note the content of the report


Introduction to the SCR IIP

3.1. The SCR IIP sets out the infrastructure required to support the achievement of the SCR SEP growth ambition: 70,000 additional jobs and 70,000 -100,000 additional homes.

3.2. The SCR IIP will form the basis for determining future SCR infrastructure projects and sets out the ‘commissioning approach’ by which future programmes will be developed.

Summary

The Sheffield City Region (SCR) Integrated Infrastructure Plan (IIP) sets out the infrastructure priorities to support stronger economic growth for The Sheffield City Region.

The SCR IIP aligns to the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) growth ambitions.

The SCR IIP is based on three key analyses: (1) a capacity analysis of SCR land and transport, (2) network analysis across SCR economic infrastructure, (3) distinct spatial packages for each SCR growth area and local centre.

The Plan will form the basis of commissioning the future SCR infrastructure programme of capital investments as well as providing recommendations on more human activity that could stimulate investment.

Scheme promoters will be asked to develop integrated proposals in spring/summer 2016.

The SCR IIP will be presented to the SCR Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Board for sign off on the 31 March. The plan will be launched at parallel summit events in London and Sheffield in the spring.

14th MARCH 2016

SHEFFIELD CITY REGION INTEGRATED INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN

3.3. Infrastructure forms an essential component of the SCR’s broader economic requirement, and sits alongside skills, inward investment and quality of place. The SCR IIP focuses on SCR’s ‘economic infrastructure’: transport, housing, land and commercial property, waste, utilities, flood defence, telecommunications and energy.

3.4. The SCR IIP is the first comprehensive, multi–discipline infrastructure plan outside London and represents national best practice in setting a strategic direction for infrastructure.

3.5. The plan highlights the importance of external, national infrastructure projects such as High Speed 2, Transport for the North and The Environment Agency plans. The SCR IIP highlights the local interventions required to capitalise on and maximise the benefit of this transformational investment.

SCR IIP Development

3.6. The SCR IIP was developed by SCR with support provided by drafting partner Arup. The project was steered by the Infrastructure Executive Board, supported at a working level by the specially established Infrastructure Development Group1.

3.7. The SCRIIP project was developed in 5 key stages:

Stage 1: Evidence Analysis and Review

Stage 2: Growth Challenges and Opportunities

Stage 3: Infrastructure Requirements

Stage 4: Infrastructure Funding Options

Stage 5: Set out the Process for Commissioning Integrated Programmes

3.8. Linked to, and building on the above stages, the SCR IIP has a number of annex reports: ‘Evidence Analysis’. ‘Challenges and Opportunities’, ‘Funding Options’, ‘Benchmark Costings’, ‘Forecast Land Use Transport Economy Modelling’, ‘Skills Analysis’.

SCR IIP Analysis

3.9. Land Use and Transport Capacity Analysis: SCR utilised a land use and transport capacity model to test the land and transport capacity to deliver the SEP ambition. The model outputs indicated that:

o SCR does have sufficient land to deliver the SEP ambition, though individual sites face viability challenges

o Significant congestion would result from growth, particularly on key arterial routes and connections between growth areas. Our analysis suggests that

1 The IDG is made up of Senior SCR Local Authority officers as well as representatives from

without intervention congestion could cost SCR over £40 billion over the next 60 years in lost productivity. Our modelling identifies the 20 corridors that are projected to experience the biggest increase in congestion.

3.10. Network Analysis: SCR worked with industry experts to identify the key challenges and opportunities by infrastructure type, based on known capacity, planned investment and forecast SEP growth. The network analysis, which is supported by a comprehensive evidence base, highlighted the following:

o Key SCR infrastructure strengths:

o Land capacity to grow: Our land use modelling indicates that SCR has suitable land to achieve its growth ambition. This land is also comparatively cheap. Our challenge is to make land more viable and productive through the provision of enabling infrastructure.

o Geographically well located: SCR is well located on the strategic transport network. Although quality and frequency of transport services needs to be improved, SCR has good connectivity potential, which could become a fundamental advantage, particularly in sectors like logistics.

o Place: Strong natural assets and a good cultural offer which will contribute to attracting and retaining talent in SCR. SCR needs to better promote itself as a place to live as well as a place to invest.

o A strong communications offer: Following the roll out of its broadband projects, SCR will have 99% broadband by 2017. Whilst seeking to plug any gaps, SCR should also promote this.

o Utilities: Utility providers have identified no strategic shortfalls in SCR over the SEP timescales. However, SCR must work with utility providers to overcome site specific issues and ensure utility programmes are fully responsive to SEP delivery.

o Key SCR infrastructure areas for improvement:

o Accelerate housing delivery: Support growth through the delivery of appropriate housing.

o Site viability: Provide enabling infrastructure to bring forward stalled development. Consider speculative build.

o Connectivity to key regions: Align with, influence and invest to gain maximum benefit from major national connectivity programmes.

o 21st Century Mass Transit: Deliver a transport offer that links SCR growth areas and urban centres.

o Overcome congestion: Our capacity analysis indicates that congestion increases would result from growth. SCR needs to mitigate this.

o Defend from flooding: Better flood alleviation programmes will enable future development and business growth in future growth areas and local centres. Also support a less reactive approach to flood risk through land use planning.

o Energy Strategy: Position SCR as a leader in low carbon, resilient

energy. Develop an energy strategy.

o Move up the waste hierarchy: Waste capacity shortfalls have been identified. SCR needs to also encourage an operational shift towards waste reuse and recycling.

o SCR as an international gateway: Strengthen the role of Doncaster Sheffield Airport and connections to it (railway station).

3.11. Spatial Packages: Based on the Evidence Review and Networks Analysis, SCR has developed distinct Spatial Packages setting out what infrastructure our Growth Areas and Urban Centres need to support the realisation of their growth potential.

o The spatial packages set out multi-discipline infrastructure intervention points linked to identified challenges and opportunities specific to that spatial area.

o The spatial packages provide a prompt for scheme promoters regarding the types of interventions required to improve the economic output of the growth areas and urban centres. These prompts will form the foundation of the SCR commissioning process.

Benchmark Costings and Funding

3.12. Consultants were appointed to estimate the potential cost of the required infrastructure interventions at a very high level. This work suggested a potential total SCR infrastructure bill of over £23 billion.

3.13. A key stage of the SCR IIP was to identify potential infrastructure funding options. This work was developed with key SCR Local Authority Funding leads, with conclusions set out in a separate annex report. Ultimately the funding report identifies that devolution forms the most significant option over and above those currently being explored.

Scheme Commissioning

3.14. The commissioning approach is about taking a top level plan and turning this into projects on the ground.

3.15. From the SCR IIP we will commission lead promoters to put forward integrated packages of investment. We will also influence the external agencies that provide our networks to develop the required proposals.

3.16. Beyond commissioning, it is assumed that all infrastructure projects will comply with the SCR Assurance Process. The SCR Assurance Framework is currently being evaluated and consideration of

Next Steps and Timescales

o SCR IIP Signoff: As part of the SCR approach to collaboration in a public private partnership, The SCR IIP will be presented to the SCR LEP Board for sign-off on 31 March 2016, it is expected the document will be updated as required during April.

o SCR IIP Launch: Summit launch events are being planned for Spring 2016

o A summit will be held in SCR aimed at local infrastructure providers, investors, businesses and potential scheme promoters.

o A summit will also be held in London aimed at senior politicians, potential major national and international investors and businesses.

o Scheme Commissioning: Scheme commissioning will commence in the Spring/Summer of

2016, based on a submission of an Expression of Interest from scheme promoters to SCR of interventions that overcome challenges identified in the SCR IIP.

o Prioritise and Agree programme: Subsequent scheme assessment and prioritisation will occur in winter 2016 with a view to agreeing a capital programme of infrastructure spend.

4. Implications

i. Financial

TBC Note challenges of budget for summit launch event

ii. Legal None

iii. Diversity None

iv. Equality None

REPORT AUTHOR: David Allatt POST: Planning and Sustainability Manager, Sheffield City Region Officer responsible: Amy Harhoff, Head of Infrastructure, Housing and Planning,

Sheffield City Region 0114 254 1211 [email protected] Background papers used in the preparation of this report are available for inspection at Other sources and references:

1. Issue

1.1. Since the completion of the SCR’s SEP in March 2014 the SCR has secured £1.25bn in funding from its Growth and Devolution Deals to deliver the vision of this Plan, in addition to further freedoms and flexibilities. Given the allocation of this additional funding and responsibilities it is considered timely to refresh the City Region’s Plan for Growth. A key objective in the completion of this refresh will be to identify the SCR’s funding priorities for its gainshare allocation and potential future LGF bids etc.

1.2. In developing these investment priorities it will also be important for the City Region to develop its assurance processes in parallel. This will ensure that robust evidence is in place to inform the decision making process that enables Leaders to compare different types of investment. The mechanism developed will need to be set out within an updated version of the SCR’s Assurance and Accountability Framework.

2. Recommendations – Combined Authority members are asked to:

2.1. Give in-principle agreement to the refresh of the SCR SEP (para 4.1)

2.2. Agree that all SCR wide strategies will be led by and follow on from the SEP.

2.3. Endorse the refreshed SEP being used as the basis for the SCR to determine its future City Region funding priorities (para 4.3).

2.4. Note that additional work will be developed in parallel on how the SCR can prioritise different types of investment that it will want to make, the conclusions of which in terms

Purpose

The Combined Authority is asked to endorse in principle the Sheffield City Region (SCR) refreshing its Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) that was completed in March 2014. This refresh will articulate in a single place the City Region’s existing delivery commitment secured through its Growth and Devolution Deals. Additionally, it is proposed that it will identify the City Region’s priorities for future funds, including further Local Growth Fund (LGF) bids and the gainshare award. On the basis it is expected that these funds will be oversubscribed there is a need to develop the SCR’s prioritisation mechanisms to ensure that it can identify the optimum programme of activity to deliver sustainable economic growth.

14th March 2016

Proposed Refresh of the Sheffield City Region Strategic Economic Plan

of approach will need to be set out within the City Region’s Assurance and Accountability Framework (para 4.5).

2.5. Provide the SCR Executive with a mandate to develop a project plan for the SEP refresh, including the approach to prioritisation. (para 4.6)


3.1. In March 2014 the SCR completed its Strategic Economic Plan (SEP). This set out a 10 year vision for a bigger and private sector growth that would culminate in the creation of 70,000 jobs. This document had two central objectives:

• To provide a single vision for growth for the SCR; and

• To act as a bidding document for Government funding.

3.2. Since the agreement of this Plan the SCR has secured £350m of funding through two Growth Deals and greater freedoms, flexibilities funding through its two Devolution Deals. Collectively these Deals have been focused on securing additional resources to deliver the vision and outcomes of our SEP.

3.3. A central element of the Sheffield City Region’s proposed Devolution Deal is the £900m gainshare funding. This is particularly significant for the City Region as this is the first amount of investment received from Government that has not been for a defined programme of activity. As such this represents the first time the SCR as a collective has the ability to decide how this should be put to the best use to unlock sustainable economic growth in the City Region.

3.4. Similarly through the proposed Devolution Deal the SCR will have the ability to retain 100% of business rate growth generated in the City Region. It is proposed that a proportion of this retained growth will be pooled to fund SCR priorities, with a subsequent need to generate a list of such priorities.

3.5. It is also expected that there will be a further round of bidding to Government for the remaining unallocated investment from the Local Growth Fund (LGF). With only £7.3bn of the £12bn already committed to Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) between 2015/16 and 2020/21 there remains significant additional funding available for areas to secure.

3.6. Over recent months a range of different pieces of work are being completed on different thematic issues in the City Region. This includes the:

• Integrated Infrastructure Plan (IIP) that identifies the City Region priorities for infrastructure investment; and

• Area Based Review (ABR) on post 16 education and training institutions in the City Region;

• Science and Innovation Audit that will commence shortly;

• SCR Vision work being led by the Universities on the long term vision for the area; and

• The development of business cases / masterplans for key SCR spatial priorities, such as the Airport, including the National College for High Speed Rail and the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District.

3.7. Additionally a number of other thematic policy areas are identifying the need to develop or refresh supporting City Region policy. Specific examples of this include the proposed refresh of the SCR Transport Strategy and the development of a five year skills and employment plan.

3.8. It is also important to consider wider policy drivers and evidence being developed, in

particular in relation to the Northern Powerhouse. Following the completion of the Northern Independent Economic Review and given other work being undertaken by Transport for the North it will be important for the SCR to be able to feed its own policy and priorities into this work.

4. Proposed Refresh of the SEP

4.1. Given the changing context since the completion of the SEP it is proposed to refresh this document. The objectives for this refresh would be to:

• Comprehensively set out the exiting commitments that the City Region is delivering, based on what it has already secured through its Growth and Devolution Deals;

• Set objectives and outcomes for the SCR to achieve collectively and within the different thematic areas and represent the lead document for other City Region wide policy;

• Identify the SCR’s additional priorities that are not currently funded, so that this Plan can be used as the basis of future funding priorities (including gainshare and future rounds of LGF); and

• Provide the policy foundation for the SCR to deliver against, including the activities of the LEP, CA and the proposed Mayor.

4.2. A refresh is proposed rather than a wholescale review for a number of reasons but mainly because our proposed Devolution Deal is founded upon the delivery of the SEP. It is envisaged that this would need to incorporate an update to the evidence base.

4.3. A key output of the SEP refresh will be that this will be used to determine the SCR’s future funding priorities. This includes funding commitments made to the City Region through its proposed Devolution Deal e.g. gainshare and business rate growth retention and for future bidding rounds e.g. LGF.

4.4. Although the City Region has secured a £900m gainshare award this only equates to £30m per annum for 30 years. As such it is envisaged that even when combined with the other sources of funding available the SCR will need to make difficult decisions on the priorities that it wants to invest in.

4.5. In order to be able to compare different types of investment the SCR will need to update its own assurance processes. Whilst the SCR has an existing Assurance and Accountability Framework in place this will need to be updated to reflect the SCR’s approach to prioritise different thematic priorities. This represents a significant task to be completed in parallel with the development of the refreshed SEP. It is recommended that the starting point for this should be the development and agreement of the principles for how we prioritise this funding.

4.6. Subject to the in principle agreement to refresh the SEP it is proposed to bring a project plan, including proposed costs and governance arrangements, to the next meeting cycle.

5. Implications

i. Financial

ii. Legal

iii. Diversity In completing the SEP refresh it will be important to consider potential diversity implications.

iv. Equality

In completing the SEP refresh it will be important to consider potential equality implications linked to the development of the Social Inclusion Framework.

REPORT AUTHOR Fiona Boden POST Senior Economic Policy and Delivery Analyst

Officer responsible Ruth Adams Organisation SCR Executive

Email [email protected] Telephone 0114 254 1223

Background papers used in the preparation of this report are available for inspection at: Other sources and references:


1. Issue

1.1. SCR CA and LEP initiated development of a social inclusion framework, as an integral companion to its Strategic Economic Plan (SEP), by the end of March 2016. The aim being to work towards a more inclusive economy and stronger local growth.

1.2. The Social Inclusion Advisory Board have recommended three key objectives underpin the SCR Framework. These three objectives will be the focus of measurement, to assess the impact that the investments made in SCR are having on households and communities. • More people in employment and paid a living wage • More people in work taking up training opportunities and progressing in work • More people living in affordable and decent quality homes, and

1.3 Following discussion with the Executive Boards the recommendation was made to also

focus upon the development of more educational pathways pertinent to the world of work. Given the crucial position an individual’s educational development has on their life trajectory.

2. Recommendations

2.1. To support the recommendation of the Social Inclusion & Equalities Advisory Board to

focus on four areas; employment & the living wage, progression routes and skills development within the workplace, educational pathways and decent homes.

Summary

• The Social Inclusion Framework – a framework for measuring the impact of social inclusion in communities across SCR – aims to consider strategies and techniques to promote social impact to accompany the growth delivered through city region investments.

• The SCR Social Inclusion Framework is seeking to create a small number of high level objectives and measures for each of the SEP policy areas and areas of investment

• This paper seeks endorsement of the framework and support for further integration into city region operational and governances processes

SCR COMBINED AUTHORITY

14th March 2016

SOCIAL INCLUSION FRAMEWORK

2.2. To endorse the framework and support ongoing work to integrate it within the city region’s

operational and governance processes, and promote this to with the executive leads within the City Region.

2.3. To agree the governance structure for the Social Inclusion Framework based upon the

option detailed in sections 3.6 and 3.7 that the representatives maintain oversight of the implementation of the framework, strengthened by Local Authority representatives to ensure alignment with the Public Sector Reform agenda.


3.1. The SCR SEP details an aspiration to achieve accelerated levels of growth and an ambition to secure local ownership of policy and operational programmes. With this ambition and aspiration come opportunities and challenges. For example the desire to increase GVA as a primary indicator of economic success can mask unintended consequences of higher than average unemployment, inactivity, disparities between communities and areas within the SCR and multiple social problems creating pressures on wider public services.

3.2. As SCR seeks to refresh its SEP and to operationalise its growth and devolution deals there is a desire from the CA and LEP to ensure that the SCR programme is cognoscente of both economic and social inclusion considerations through development and implementation of a SCR Social Inclusion Framework.

3.3. A working group of the Social Inclusion Advisory Board, has developed a framework for promoting, measuring and understanding the impact of social inclusion for the CA and LEP Boards to consider in March 2016

3.4. The framework provides a strategic driver to deliver socially inclusive growth and to

understand the impact of economic growth where there are barriers to economic and social inclusion. It takes account of and includes regional and national practice that is effective and well recognised. It delivers a “fit” with other sets of measures and targets for the executive leads within the City Region and integration with the public equalities duties. It outlines how these can be embedded into SCR processes and governance.

3.5. A paper has been taken to each of the Executive Boards, all of which have broadly supported the aims and provided constructive feedback and in some cases challenge. Each board has offered to help develop the detail for the business cycle and performance metrics by identifying officers or partners to work on this agenda. Their observations have contributed to the Framework,

3.6. It is proposed that the current Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board are tasked by the LEP and CA to provide advice on strategic issues and oversight of the Framework implementation and operationalisation.

3.7. Subject to decisions regarding the future remit of the Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board, it is also recommended that the Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board is strengthened to include 2 representatives from local authorities with responsibility for the public service reform agenda. This will support the cross-cutting nature of the social inclusion activity, take cognoscente of public sector reform and provide a focus for embedding the strategy.

3.8. The Framework is in active development and still requires agreement with policy and practitioner colleagues and partners to refine indicators notably in relation to Housing and Transport.

3.9. If agreed, the Framework will require ongoing work to embed within the business process of SCR to ensure social inclusion considerations are integrated into the ongoing activity and that impact can be measured. Consideration should be given to integrating this social inclusion representation across the 5 Executive Boards in the future.

3.10. The draft Framework is at Appendix 1.

4. Implications

i. Financial There will be financial implications for the future to enable the Framework to be effectively embedded in city region processes over the coming year. Future financial commitments will be included in the budget for the development of the SCR evaluation strategy and commissioning of the programme of evaluation.

ii. Legal There are no legal requirements mandating the Combined Authority to maintain a Social Inclusion Framework. However, adopting a Framework is a commendable move and would be considered good practice in discharging the SEP objectives.

iii. Diversity Many of these households will be from a number of ethnic communities, those who have traditionally been under represented in the labour market or operating in the lower paid jobs. Evaluation and monitoring will also cover those groups who are most at risk of experience of disadvantage in the labour market, people with disabilities, through race, age, sex and pregnancy or maternity, marriage or civil partnership, sexual orientation, religious beliefs.

iv. Equality Through the development, endorsement and implementation of the Social inclusion Framework SCR is actively promoting an approach to increase access to economic opportunity for households who are the either not working or in work and below the poverty line.

Report Authors:- Eleanor Dearle Social Inclusion Project Officer Officer responsible: Ruth Adams Post: Director of Skills and Performance Organisation Sheffield City Region Executive Team Email [email protected] Telephone: 0114 254 1211 078 Mobile: 07817 738784 Background papers used in the preparation of this report are available for inspection at Sheffield City Region Executive Team, Advanced Manufacturing Park, AMP, Brunel Way, Rotherham, S60 5WG Other sources and references:

• SCR proposal on devolution to government. • Social Inclusion Strategy Green Paper • JRF reports on city growth and addressing poverty – More jobs Better Jobs • Stronger Growth, better outcomes , sustainable services SCR report • How can local skills JRF and Skills Policy SCR • Monitoring poverty & social exclusion 2015 – JRF

Executive Summary Sheffield City Region has high aspirations to achieve accelerated levels of growth and devolution ambitions for determination of policy and resources. The vision is for ambitious economic growth, which is also inclusive and maximises opportunities for all communities in SCR to share in the benefits of growth. The Social Inclusion Framework sets out the aim, objectives, principles and methodology by which city region will promote and monitor additional positive social impact through its investments and interventions. Social inclusion will be embedded within the city region’s business processes and a performance management matrix details a suite of social inclusion indicators. The approach to promoting social inclusion SCR’s Social Inclusion Framework aims to capture and incorporate the social and economic impact of direct investments within the strategic management of SCR, to integrate social inclusion impacts as well as economic growth into the performance measurements and performance framework and to capture and measure the impact of direct investment through SCR on disadvantaged communities. The proposed set of indicators, are intended to encourage and promote the economic and social inclusion of these communities. The Social Inclusion Framework The Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board identified 4 key objectives to underpin the framework. The objectives will be the focus for measurement to assess impact of the investments of SCR on individuals, households and communities.

More people in employment and paid a living wage

More people in work taking up training opportunities and progressing in work,

More people living in affordable and decent quality homes, and

Greater skills and educational attainment meeting labour market need and pathways perti-nent to work

The framework and its performance indicators will promote social inclusion across the full range of the city region’s activities, focussing on key levers for inclusion as exemplified below:-

The Social Inclusion Framework aims to enable Sheffield City Region to deliver economic growth whilst maximising the opportunities in SCR for all residents to share in the benefits of growth.

14th March 2016

Draft Social Inclusion Framework

Employment Employment support helps to deliver the SEP objective of increasing jobs through improving individuals’ employability, promoting active inclusion and combating discrimination and therefore improving the quality of the labour market and providing businesses with a skilled and confident workforce. It contributes towards the social inclusion objective of “more people in employment and paid a living wage” by

Supporting more people into work by tackling barriers, increasing employability and linking to new and sustained employment opportunity.

Reducing the number of people outside of the labour market

Strategy, commissioning, appraisal and contracting will promote social inclusion and relevant indicators will capture information from SCR employment programmes and, where possible, through national programmes.

This activity will also apply the knowledge of good practice, what works and how it works, to inform the commissioning of future programmes and align with the work on Public Sector Reform. Skills SCR has devolved skills funding and invests in a range of programmes to deliver the following outcomes. It contributes towards the SEP objectives of increasing jobs including higher skills jobs by developing the skills of employed and unemployed people. It contributes to all the social inclusion objectives, excluding the delivery of homes, by:-

Progressing employees and lifting the skills profile of the city region.

Employability programmes to deliver the skills for people to access employment

Increasing apprenticeships, including those at higher levels

Improving educational attainment and outcomes through informed investment in careers work in schools and building links between business, schools and FE provision for 16 – 18 year olds.

Business Growth Business Growth contributes to all the key ambitions of the SEP and without this opportunities for social inclusion are limited. A small number of indicators will be used to promote and assess social impact in SCR from business growth, including measuring the change on a Local Authority and ward level. Business Growth will contribute chiefly to the social inclusion objectives of “more people in employment and paid a living wage”, “more people in work taking up training opportunities and progressing in work” and developing pathways to employment for young people. These specific contributions are:

More businesses investing in their workforce, through training and promotion.

More quality apprenticeship opportunities, in particular through the construction and transport hubs.

Increase of local supply chain opportunities and support.

% Employed local people from the city region.

Payment of the national living wage.

Infrastructure Investing in appropriate infrastructure in the best place to attract growth is a key enabler of growth. The investment in the connectivity of utilities, energy, telecommunications and broadband connectivity, low carbon infrastructures, and transport networks underpin the context for business development, housing, community connectivity and growth. In relation to social inclusion, lower paid workers and young people are more likely to be reliant on public transport; therefore good relational locations of affordable housing, employment opportunities with reliable public transport are essential to supporting access to employment. Employment Zones and other new employment area need to be well connected to local populations and have good access to public transport.

Along with investments in housing and transport, infrastructure will also make direct contributions to “more people in employment and paid the living wage” by promoting access to employment in construction contracts and supply chains Housing The city region aims to unlock sites for 14,000 new homes. Secure and affordable homes for lower earners are an important aspect of social inclusion and reduction of deprivation levels in the city region. Housing policy can also address financial stress by reducing fuel poverty through more energy efficient homes and ensuring decent homes in locations with access to employment. Transport Transport is a major enabler of inclusion by ensuring that communities and local areas are connected through integrated transport routes and enabling people to better access sites for employment. Increased public transport connectivity enables people to extend their travel to work area and have full access to the city region’s employment opportunities. A lack of access to public transport is often cited as a barrier to work by people living in the more remote deprived communities, especially young people as they are more likely to be in low paying work and unable to afford reliable private transport. How the Framework will be integrated across interventions The Framework embeds a range of principles which will inform SCR investments and interventions to ensure that public investment promotes sustainable growth and reflects the following principles:- Public Funds - Investment from the public purse should bring benefits to the public as a whole, deliv-

ering value for money interventions and shared benefit.

Market Failure – Investment deliver additional growth by addressing issues of market failure to create longer-term sustainability for the city region’s businesses and communities.

Sustained growth - Social Inclusion is a driver for sustainable growth, both through community and social enterprises and by promoting greater inclusivity, higher functioning businesses and quality jobs

Integration - All economic interventions have impact upon individuals and communities and the city region will favour those interventions that combine positive economic growth with positive social im-pact.

Embedding the Framework through the city region’s business processes The Social Inclusion Framework is embedded in all SCR business processes from initial mandate to final reporting.

Strategy and Commissioning - Social inclusion to be embedded within strategic principles and commis-sioning frameworks and specifications, with applicants assessed on the positive social impact they will deliver. City region initiatives such as the Skills Bank and Growth Hub provide the opportunity to gather up to date data on business growth and skills needs, which can inform future interventions. Appraisal - Projects and proposals appraisal will include weighted criteria to focus public funds on those proposals, that create the greatest sustainable growth and to enable risks to social inclusion to be identi-fied and mitigated against.

• Include consideration of fit with Social Inclusion Framework • Calls for

proposals/ etc. frameworks include social inclusion strategy

Mandate (Strategic Fit/Prioritisation)

Include consideration of positive social impact/mitigation of negative social impact in appraisal

Outline Business Case

Consideration of additional/value for money in relation to social inclusion results/ impact

Full Business Case

• Use of Social Value Act freedoms to contract for social impact results based on business plan

Contracting

• Monitor social inclusion results as part of normal monitoring process

Delivery

• Measure impact

Closure

Procurement - Procurement and contracting will maximise the potential of the Social Value Act to take account of social impact and include specific conditions to deliver additional benefits to the region through the addition of social inclusion metrics and clauses in contracts. Performance Management and Monitoring - Social inclusion impact and metrics metrics are embedded within SCR’s performance management, monitoring and reporting systems to enable the city region to understand and promote social impact. Engagement – of geographical communities and communities of interest and consideration and monitoring of both disadvantaged communities and people of protected characteristics. Governance The current Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board will continue as a separate board to steer the implementation of the Framework and facilitate cross board working. This complements its role on the strategic development and commissioning of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) under the social inclusion programmes and co-design with other boards of ESF funds in the “Active Inclusion”, priority 1.4 It is proposed that the Combined Authority and LEP Boards devolve strategic decision making powers in these areas to the Social Inclusion and Equalities Advisory Board in activity decisions on mandates, outline and final business cases The situation to be reviewed at the end of 12 months to identify if a separate board is still required or if it is possible to embed Social Inclusion representation within the Executive Boards.

Performance Management Framework Matrix

GVA targets SEP Priorities Areas of investment Social Inclusion Indicators Existing SCR headline indicators Baseline data Tracking progress

Generic Across All Themes

Jobs – 70,000

More Jobs

1. Ensure new businesses

receive the support they need

to flourish

Business GrowthMore People in Employment and Paid

the Living Wage

- with 30,000 in

higher skilled

occupations

2. Facilitate and proactively

support growth amongst

existing firms

Skills, Employment and Education* Number of direct jobs created by SCR

InvestmentNumbers of jobs created

To use current data for baseline information or

establish a baseline position within the first

year.

Embedded in the monitoring of progress

against targets within the Performance

Management Framework.

GVA - Increase by

£3.1 billion

3. Attract investment from

other parts of the UK and

overseas, and improve our

brand

Infrastructure

* Interventions to support the suply

chain to improve employment

opportuntities for local people

% local people employed on prime and

sub contracts through the supply chains.

4. Increase sales of SCR's

goods and services to other

parts of the UK and abroad

Housing * More pople paid the living wage

Number of people employed through

contracts that pay a minumum of the

living wage

-to include local authority area, postcode or

super output area, to measure the impact on

the most disadvantaged areas.

-to include local authority area, postcode

or super output area, to measure the

impact on the most disadvantaged areas.

Businesses -

6,000 More

Businesses

5. Develop the City Region’s

skills base, labour mobility

and education performance

Transport * Previously unemployed people gaining

employment

Number of unemployed people gaining

employment (ESIF Indicator)

-to include data on ethnicity and refugee / new

migrant communities

-to include data on ethnicity and refugee /

new migrant communities .

6. Secure investment in

infrastructure where it will do

most to support growth Greater skills and educational

attainment meeting labour market need

and pathways pertinant to work

Housing - 14,000 High quality

new and affordable homes in

the right place

* More apprenticeships Number of apprenticeships

Transport - Sustainable

Transport Programme

* Number of Business connections

with schools, FE and HEI

New indicator required to quantify

business intervnetions with educational

bodies


SCR Theme Specific to Theme

More peope in Employment and paid

the living wage

Greater skills and educational



* Generic indicators for jobs, supply

chains, apprenticeships

More People in Employment and Paid

the Living Wage

* Number of people moving from out of

work to being in work

Increase in the number of people into

work

Tracked through performance data. SCR

has an ambition to achieve a data sharing

agreement with DWP.

* Number of people gaining sustained

work

Increase number of people into

sustained work The ILR will be reviewed annually

* Number of people moving from

inactivity to labour market activity

A reduction in the numbers of people out

of work including economic inactivity

(ESIF Indicator)

The targets of increased numbers of

people into employment will be agreed

and set through the DWP, ESF and other

funding streams:-

* Reduction of people without basic

qualificationsPeople gaining basic skills (ESIF)

More people in work taking up training

opportuntities and progressing in work

* In work progression – Workforce

development to meet current and future

business needs

Increase the number of people in work

and achieving new skills and

progression

* The number of people who take up

training & skills acquisition, whilst in work




* Number of apprenticeships Increase in the number of

apprenticeships offered* Number of apprenticeships created

* Number of apprentices continuing in

work

* Number of Business connections

with schools, FE and HEI

Businesses suppported to develop

business and education links (ESIF)* ESIF monitoring

- Skills Bank delivers additional

data on business skill needs –

InfrastructureMore People in Employment and Paid

the Living Wage






Number of new businesses

* Increased number of businesses

Business Growth Number of new businesses

Skills, Employment and Education -

Employment programmes

Labour Market Information is due to be

refreshed in Summer 2014 and thereafter

annually

Establishing current baseline data



More People Living in affordable and

decent quality homes

* Developing and building affordable

homes.Number of affordable homes

% of affordable homes within the overall

target

TBC


the Living Wage






Access to sites of employment. TBC Plans for transport projects TBC

Linking communities to employment

sites.

Engaging communities geographical

and communities of interest in decision

making.

Engaging communities.Geographical communities &

communities of interest engaged


the Living Wage






Housing

Transport

TBC

Performance Management Framework Matrix


Generic Across All Themes

Jobs – 70,000 More

Jobs

1. Ensure new businesses receive

the support they need to flourish

Business Growth More People in Employment and Paid the

Living Wage

- with 30,000 in higher

skilled occupations

2. Facilitate and proactively support

growth amongst existing firms

Skills, Employment

and Education

* Number of direct jobs created by SCR

Investment

Numbers of jobs created To use current data for baseline

information or establish a baseline

position within the first year.

Embedded in the monitoring of progress

against targets within the Performance

Management Framework.

GVA - Increase by £3.1

billion

3. Attract investment from other

parts of the UK and overseas, and

improve our brand

Infrastructure * Interventions to support the suply chain to

improve employment opportuntities for local

people

% local people employed on prime and sub

contracts through the supply chains.

4. Increase sales of SCR's goods

and services to other parts of the UK

and abroad

Housing * More people paid the living wage Number of people employed through

contracts that pay a minumum of the living

wage

-to include local authority area,

postcode or super output area, to

measure the impact on the most

disadvantaged areas.

-to include local authority area, postcode or

super output area, to measure the impact on

the most disadvantaged areas.

Businesses - 6,000

More Businesses

5. Develop the City Region’s skills

base, labour mobility and education

performance

Transport * Previously unemployed people gaining

employment

Number of unemployed people gaining

employment (ESIF Indicator)

-to include data on ethnicity and

refugee / new migrant communities

-to include data on ethnicity and refugee /

new migrant communities .

6. Secure investment in

infrastructure where it will do most to

support growth

Greater skills and educational attainment

meeting labour market need and pathways

pertinant to work

Housing - 14,000 High quality new

and affordable homes in the right

place

* More apprenticeships Number of apprenticeships

Transport - Sustainable Transport

Programme

* Number of Business connections with

schools, FE and HEI

New indicator required to quantify business

intervnetions with educational bodies



More peope in Employment and paid the

living wage



pertinant to work

* Generic indicators for jobs, supply chains,

apprenticeships

More People in Employment and Paid the

Living Wage

* Number of people moving from out of work to

being in work

Increase in the number of people into work Tracked through performance data. SCR has

an ambition to achieve a data sharing

agreement with DWP.

* Number of people gaining sustained work Increase number of people into sustained

work

The ILR will be reviewed annually

* Number of people moving from inactivity to

labour market activity

A reduction in the numbers of people out of

work including economic inactivity (ESIF

Indicator)

The targets of increased numbers of people

into employment will be agreed and set

through the DWP, ESF and other funding

streams:-

* Reduction of people without basic

qualifications

People gaining basic skills (ESIF)

More people in work taking up training

opportuntities and progressing in work

* In work progression – Workforce development

to meet current and future business needs

Increase the number of people in work and

achieving new skills and progression

* The number of people who take up

training & skills acquisition, whilst in work



pertinant to work

* Number of apprenticeships Increase in the number of apprenticeships

offered

* Number of apprenticeships created

* Number of apprentices continuing in work

* Number of Business connections with

schools, FE and HEI

Businesses suppported to develop business

and education links (ESIF)

* ESIF monitoring

- Skills Bank delivers additional data on

business skill needs –

Infrastructure More People in Employment and Paid the

Living Wage



pertinant to work

Number of new businesses

Skills, Employment

and Education -

Employment

programmes

Labour Market Information is due to

be refreshed in Summer 2014 and

thereafter annually

Establishing current baseline data Number of new businesses

* Increased number of businesses

Business Growth


apprenticeships



More People Living in affordable and decent

quality homes

* Developing and building affordable homes. Number of affordable homes Housing Units completed

TBC


Living Wage



pertinant to work


apprenticeships

Access to sites of employment. Transport accessibility Assess current houses and

businesses to see which are

accessible

Measured using LUTI tool

Linking communities to employment sites. Tracking accessiblity of businesses and

homes

Engaging communities geographical and

communities of interest in decision making.

Engaging communities. Plans for transport projects Geographical communities & communities of

interest engaged


Living Wage



pertinant to work


apprenticeships

Housing

Transport

TBC

1. Issue

1.1. To inform the Board of the intention to lead a bid to the STTY fund, to highlight the tight timescales and the intended sign off process.

2. Recommendations

2.1. That the Authority notes the paper contents and the benefit of applying to the STTY fund.

2.2. That the Authority notes the short timescales and agree the intended sign off process.

2.3. That the Authority approve the award of an £18k grant to SYPTE to commission consultancy to support a bid into the STTY fund.

2.4. That the Authority notes that the Transport Executive Board (TEB) will consider the longer-term approach to this type of activity.


3.1. In the 2015 Autumn Statement, the Chancellor announced £580 million (£80 million revenue and £500 million capital) for sustainable travel to be made available through the

Summary

• The current Local Sustainable Transport Fund 2 (LSTF2) allocation ends on 31/03/16 • The DfT announced continuation funding on 15/02/16 to bridge the gap between the

end of LSTF2 and the start of a new Access Fund which will be announced later in 2016.

• Up to £2.5million is available to Combined Authority applicants through a competitive bidding process this funding focuses upon cycling, walking and access to employment

• A process has been undertaken with partners and transport Head of Service representatives, to propose the schemes for inclusion

• The bidding process will be led by the Sheffield City Region (SCR) and delivered by our partners.

• Due to limited resources within the SCR Transport Team and the tight timescales, consultancy support has been sought to assist with the application process

• The deadline for Sustainable Travel Transition Year (STTY) applications is 29/03/16

14th MARCH 2016

Sustainable Travel Transition Year Funding Bid

‘Access Fund’. The Access Fund will formally launch later in 2016, to start in 2017/18. To support the transition between now and then, the DfT has committed £20 million of the £80 million revenue to sustainable travel projects in 2016/17. The remaining £60 million will be launched later this year as the Access fund.

3.2. Consortiums (including Combined Authorities), may bid for up to £2.5 million for the continuation of successful sustainable transport projects and to deliver improved access to jobs, skills, training and education. The fund favours schemes that focus on cycling and walking.

3.3. The SCR Combined Authority has previously supported this initiative and been successful in securing over £30m investment from DfT in sustainable transport. This funding competition provides an opportunity to continue to promote sustainable modes of travel.

3.4. As with previous submission, Nottingham County Council and Derbyshire County Council will be considering separately whether to bid for funding as the Highway Authority for their respective areas. This bid is intended to be targeted within South Yorkshire but the potential to collaborate with the respective highways authorities will be explored.

Resource Constraints

3.5. The fund was announced on 15th February 2016 with a deadline of 29th March 2016. Due to the time constraints and limited resource in the SCR, we have sought consultancy support to assist the application process. This proposal was supported by the TEB.

Strategic Fit and Deliverability

3.6. Sustainable transport is one of the Combined Authorities’ key approaches to managing demand within the transport network. This type of investment typically has a high benefit cost ratio, supports economic growth and delivers wider benefits through reducing emissions and improving quality of life.

3.7. A meeting was chaired by the SCR on 25th February attended by officer representatives from the South Yorkshire Local Authorities, SYPTE and the Local Transport Plan team, to agree the strategic approach and list of schemes for the bid.

3.8. Each scheme submission was prioritised based upon strategic fit with the aims of the bid and deliverability. The revised list was provisionally agreed and included an allowance for risk and monitoring activity. This position was endorsed by transport Head of Service representatives on 29/02/16.

3.9. If successful, this funding will enable the continuation of a reduced programme of LSTF2 activity, currently delivered by SYPTE and Local Authority partners. This activity targets sustainable travel and access to employment, which is in line with the SCR Transport Strategy policies and supports the objectives outlined in our Strategic Economic Plan (SEP).

3.10. The Transport Executive Board has committed to refresh the Transport Strategy and supporting delivery plans in 2016/17. This process will ensure SCR has a clear and compelling approach for this area of activity and will allow the Combined Authority to continue to explore opportunities for devolution of this type of fund in the future.

Timescales and Next Steps

3.11. The TEB was briefed on the opportunity to bid for this funding at their meeting on 23rd February and supported a submission from the SCR. To show commitment to the fund and secure the appropriate approval, it is proposed that once the final document has been prepared, the bid is endorsed by Cllr Julie Dore as Chair of the Transport Executive Board

and signed-off by Cllr Sir Steve Houghton as Chair of the Combined Authority. The table below highlights the timings for these stages.

MILESTONE ACTIVITY March 17th Draft bid circulated to partners for comments March 21st Deadline for partner comments w/c March 21st Brief TEB and CA Chair on final bid and sign off March 29th Submission of bid

4. Implications

i. Financial If successful the bid will see up to £2.5 million of revenue funding brought into the SCR for the delivery of revenue activity. Delivery will be undertaken by partners, so does not represent a resource pressure on the SCR. The total cost of the appointment to undertake the STTY application will be £18,000. This will be funded through existing budgets for consultancy support. This appointment will be made through SYPTE’s procurement framework to expedite quick commissioning. CA Leaders are asked to approve a grant of £18k to SYPTE to resource the activity. Acceptance of grant falls within the purview of the Section 151 officer who will review all grant determination information before accepting any grant offer on behalf of the Authority.

ii. Legal None

iii. Diversity None

iv. Equality None

REPORT AUTHOR Chloe Shepherd POST Strategy and Policy Officer Officer responsible: Julie Hurley, Director of Transport Sheffield City Region Tel: 01142 211 340,

Email: [email protected]

Record No. JAGU to Complete

Executive Board Resolution Record Resolutions Taken - Summary New programme to support business start ups – it was RESOLVED, that the Board Members:

1. Note the development of the New Business Vision as the SCR’s working policy to deliver the SEP targets.

2. Recommend to the SCR CA / LEP that a strategic mandate is developed for this activity and considered for approval to enter the SCR programme.

Business Plan 16/17 - it was RESOLVED: that the Board Members note the draft Business Plan for 16/17 (presented at Appendix A to the report) and agree this be recommended to the CA and incorporated into a composite SCR CA / LEP Delivery Plan for 16/17. MIPIM 2016 Delegated Authority - it was RESOLVED, that the Board members recommend to the Combined Authority that delegation for signing a number of operational contracts be given to the Interim Executive Director under his general management delegations for expenditure relating to the delivery of MIPIM (total value of £70k for 2015/16 – 2016/17) Supporting notes and contextual Information New programme to support business start-ups – the Board were presented with an emerging vision for a new programme of business support schemes to encourage new enterprises to develop in the city region. This was to secure outline support for the development of a new programme which will be taken through the SCR Assurance Framework process by the Executive Board in Q1 16/17. Is additional due diligence recommended by the Board? Business Plan 16/17 – the Board asked for some amendments to be made to the finalised business plan, particularly ensuring that appropriate outputs are captured within the plan.

Executive Board Business Growth Executive Board

Date of Meeting: 23rd February

Chair Paul Houghton

Chair to sign to confirm this is a true record of the resolutions made at the meeting

Confirmation that Senior Officers have endorsed the Resolution record (name and date)

Executive Director S151 Officer Monitoring

Officer

Records of Resolutions are public

documents


Executive Board Resolution Record Resolutions Taken - Summary Item 5. Update on SCR Integrated Infrastructure Plan Housing Section The Housing Executive Board endorsed the SCR IIP, in relation to the prominence of housing as one of three strategic long-term aims. Item 6. Housing Executive Board Business Plan The Housing Executive Board noted the draft Business Plan for 2016/17 be recommended to be incorporated into the composite SCR CA / LEP Delivery Plan for 16/17. Item 7. Case for SCR Housing Delivery Team It was resolved that Board members:

1. Agree to the proposition that a small housing delivery team working across Sheffield City

Region should be created carrying out the functions outlined in the paper. 2. Subject to the approved SCR Executive Team budget and budget planning process, to

submit for consideration an indicative resource request of £350,000 p.a. for 3 years (£200,000 in the first year) to fund the team.

3. Agree to updates at each Board meeting regarding the activity and outputs of the team; and

to commission a review of its effectiveness after one year 4. Agree to delegate responsibility for agreeing the detailed structure and job remits of

individual members of the team to the SCR Executive Director. Supporting notes and contextual Information Item 5. Update on SCR Integrated Infrastructure Plan Housing Section Item 5 provided an update on the Sheffield City Region Integrated Infrastructure Plan (SCR IIP) Housing findings, process and recommendations that will be going forward to the Infrastructure Executive Board.

Executive Board Housing

Date of Meeting: 24th February 2016

Chair Huw Bowen




Officer


documents

The paper outlined the role of Housing within the SCR Integrated Infrastructure Plan and highlighted the key housing challenges and opportunities for the SCR over the next decade. Item 6. Housing Executive Board Business Plan Item 6. Introduced the Housing Business Plan for 16/17 which has been developed based on the key strategic outcomes that are well established within the city region’s Strategic Economic Plan, the programme of activity that the Board have been developing over 15/16 and the emerging themes within the SCRIIP. Is additional due diligence recommended by the Board? Use this section to indicate if, in the Board’s opinion, further due diligence by Senior Officers, or additional advice is needed. This will help highlight concerns and facilitate smoother final sign off


Executive Board Resolution Record Resolutions Taken – Summary Agenda item 5: SCR Devolution Deal – Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (AGE)

• Recommendation to accept AGE grant for a second year Agenda item 6: SCR Capital – Rotherham Centre for Higher Skills

• Recommendation to progress the application to Full Business Case (FBC) noting that the Outline Business Case (OBC) had considerable weaknesses which need to be addressed on a twin track basis with the FBC, noting that the FBC will not be appraised until the caveats around the OBC have been addressed

Agenda item 7: SCR Capital – National College for High Speed Rail

• Recommendation to progress to final budget approval and contract negotiations for Rail College, Doncaster Campus

Agenda item 9.1: Devolution of employment programmes

• Endorsed to advise the ESIF Committee we want to re-scope ESF allocations in line with the devolution programme

Agenda item 11: Skills Executive Board Business Plan

• Endorsed business plan for inclusion in SCR LEP / CA delivery plan and as the basis for performance dashboards

Agenda item: AOB

• Endorsed that the Exec Team consider more detailed work on CDI skills needs Supporting notes and contextual Information Agenda item 5: SCR Devolution Deal – Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (AGE)

• The board were presented with a paper outlining an additional allocation of the AGE grant (£2.93m)for 2016/17

Agenda item 6: SCR Capital – Rotherham Centre for Higher Skills

• The board were presented with a paper outlining the current status of this proposal including a summary of feedback from the moderation panel following appraisal of the Outline Business Case

Executive Board Skills, Employment and Education


Chair Nigel Brewster




Officer


documents

• The Executive Board are asked to consider whether (a) the Scheme Promotor addresses the concerns regarding the strategic, economic and commercial case and submit a second iteration of the outline business case (OBC) or (b) whether the scheme progresses to full business case (FBC) but with caveats detailed and requesting that a clear action plan is put in place to address the urgent gaps in information, prior to the assessment of the FBC.

Agenda item 7: SCR Capital – National College for High Speed Rail

• The board were presented with a paper outlining approval of national funding for the Doncaster Campus of the National College for High Speed Rail following due diligence of the business case.

• The paper recommended to the board that the SCR CA align its assurance and appraisal process for the £6m Local Growth Fund contribution with the national assurance process and therefore the Exec Board are asked to recommend to the SCR CA agreement to release the £6m funding commitment/contribution from the Local Growth Fund.

Agenda item 9.1: Devolution of employment programmes

• The board were presented with a paper outlining the latest position in negotiations with DWP. • The paper asked the board to endorse the decision to re-allocate current ESF funding from the

Progress to Work programme and into the Work & Health Programme and SCR devolution pilot for the harder to help.

Agenda item 11: Skills Executive Board Business Plan

• Endorsed business plan for inclusion in SCR LEP / CA delivery plan and as the basis for performance dashboards

Agenda item: AOB

• The board were presented with a paper outlining the Skills, Employment and Education Business Plan for 2016/17

• The Board were asked to comment on the narrative table of the plan and recommend this to the SCR CA for inclusion in the composite SCR Delivery Plan 16/17

Is additional due diligence recommended by the Board? N/A


Executive Board Resolution Record Resolutions Taken - Summary LSTF Transitional Funding: RESOLVED, that Members endorse the submission of the bid and agree the submission should be signed off by the Chairs of the CA and TEB. Network Rail, Hendy Consultation: RESOLVED, that the Board agrees that Cllr Dore may sign off the consultation response TEB Business Plan - RESOLVED, that subject to the provision of the revised version, the Board Members agree to submit, to the SCR CA, the draft 2016/17 TEB Business plan for ratification as part of the SCR Delivery Plan 16/17. Gainshare – RESOLVED, that the Board will go through the proposed Gainshare programme for transport in more detail at the next meeting. Transport for the North - RESOLVED, that the Board Members:

1. Note the progress of the Cities & Local Government Devolution Act in setting TfN as a

statutory organization. 2. To note the process for commenting on the TfN March Report. 3. Note the progress being made on the TfN workstreams. 4. Recommend the CA agree the spending of up to £100,000 to develop an evidence base for

complementary enhancements to the TfN Programme. TransPennine Tunnel - RESOLVED, that the Board Members:

1. Note the key project milestones and approve the proposed governance approach to provide

input into the TPTS. 2 Note the need to steer the TPTS from the SCR perspective.

Rail North - RESOLVED, that the Members 1. Note the content of this report.

Executive Board Transport

Date of Meeting: 23 February 2016

Chair Martin McKervey




Officer


documents

2. Request that the CA bestow the nomination for Deputy Director of Rail North.

Supporting notes and contextual Information Membership – ACTION – Craig Tyler to progress discussions and seek nominations TEB Business Plan - ACTION – David Allatt to make the amends discussed and circulate the revised version for email endorsement. SCR Integrated Infrastructure Plan (SCR IIP) – ACTION – David Allatt to circulate the SCR IIP presentation to TEB members Is additional due diligence recommended by the Board? Use this section to indicate if, in the Board’s opinion, further due diligence by Senior Officers, or additional advice is needed. This will help highlight concerns and facilitate smoother final sign off

1. Issue

1.1. This report presents the draft 2016/17 TEB Business Plan for approval.

2. Recommendations

2.1. The SCR CA is asked to approve / ratify the draft 2016/17 TEB Business as part of the SCR Delivery Plan 16/17.


3.1 Draft Business Plans for 2016/17 have been completed for each of the 5 SCR Executive Boards. The Business Plans will support the development of an abridged cross cutting / Corporate Business Plan to include programme management, marketing, economic analysis, assurance, evaluation and administrative capacity.

3.2 The Business Plan draft has been developed to:

• Inform development of the SCR 2016/17 Capital and Revenue Programme

• Enable us to develop a SCR Corporate business plan for the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and CA, open to scrutiny internally by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and wider audit / partners.

3.3 All Executive Board Business Plans have been developed based on a standardised template. The proposed key activities of the Board that are included in the Business Plan are set out below:

This paper presents the draft 2016/17 Sheffield City Region (SCR) Transport Executive Board (TEB) Business Plan to the SCR Combined Authority (CA) for approval. The Business Plan has been developed with guidance from the TEB and from senior LA officers.

The business plan breaks into two key areas – Delivery and Strategy & Policy. Delivery of key local programmes such as the Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP) is important. In parallel the TEB must support strategy development to ensure SCR benefits from key national programmes such as Transport for the North.

The draft TEB Business Plan, which has been endorsed by the TEB, is attached as Appendix A.

14th March 2016

TRANSPORT EXECUTIVE BOARD BUSINESS PLAN

Type Work area Current Activity

DELIVERY

Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP)

Deliver the Sustainable Transport Programme aligning investment in capital and revenue activity. Building on this initial programme though devolution to deliver a targeted action plan for sustainable transport

Local Transport Plan Oversee delivery of schemes against the annual Integrated Transport Block allocation. Activities led by the four local authorities and SYPTE to address local transport issues including traffic management, safer roads, accessibility, air quality, sustainability and major scheme planning

Local Highways Maintenance

The TEB will be responsible for overseeing delivery of the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and highways maintenance pot (currently delivered by the Local Authorities) and any other successful funding bids.

STRATEGY AND

POLICY

Transport for the North A wide ranging, Pan-Northern, project that seeks to provide the Northern Powerhouse with transformation investment in City to City connectivity

High Speed Rail Led by the HS2 Programme Board to develop the case for HS2 in SCR

Devolution Deal –transport

Drive forward the agreed components of the SCR devolution deal according to the evidence and level of political support.

Strategic Rail Support the timely delivery of key Network Rail projects and studies.

Air Quality Preparation of bids to the Office of Low Emission Vehicles and DfT to secure investment in the bus fleet to reduce emissions

SCR Transport Strategy and Vision

Progress a refreshed and agreed SCR Transport Strategy that reflects recent opportunities and joins together other transport workstreams with a common vision for improving connectivity. This includes setting the policy direction of the SYPTE

Connectivity to Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District (AMID)

Develop connectivity solutions for the AMID, linked to its future masterplan and level of ambition. This will include investigation of heavy rail / tram train options.

SCR as an International Gateway

Support Doncaster Sheffield Airport as a key international gateway by developing the case for enhanced connections to it. This includes supporting the development and delivery of an airport railway station.

Modelling Develop and implement the SCR modelling strategy, ensuring that interventions can be properly tested based on robust evidence. This includes ensuring technical tools are suitably up to date.

3.1. There are a number of cross-cutting work streams relevant to other Executive Boards and these links will be flagged up in the integrated business plan. As previously agreed, there will be close communication with other Boards.

3.2. A risk register as been produced setting out how TEB risks will be mitigated in more detail. This register will be presented to the TEB on a regular basis to ensure effective management of the risks.

4. Implications

i. Financial

Business Plan includes financial section. This aligns with the SCR Budget for 2016/17 and includes separately priorities that are currently unfunded.

ii. Legal None

iii. Diversity None

iv. Equality None

REPORT AUTHOR: David Allatt POST: Planning and Sustainability Manager, Sheffield City Region Officer responsible: Julie Hurley, Director of Transport Sheffield City Region 0114 2211263

[email protected] Background papers used in the preparation of this report are available for inspection at Other sources and references Appendix A: Draft TEB Business Plan

Sheffield City Region Transport Executive Board DRAFT Business Plan: 2016/17 Contents

1. Key investments in 2016/17

2. What are the key milestones in 2016/17

3. What outputs and outcomes will be delivered in 2016/17?

4. What are the risks and how will we mitigate them?

5. What are the resource requirements?

1. What are our key investments in 2016/17? This section outlines key investments in 2016/17.

1.1 Supporting strategic objectives

Our key focus this year is securing commitment to transformational transport connectivity through major national programmes, and putting in place the strategic framework and delivery approach for future local transport investment.

Transport is a key cross cutting component of the SEP and a key facilitator of jobs and growth which is often linked to large numbers of jobs as a key enabler. The SCR TEB constitutes a diverse set of actions linked to a transformative and unprecedented time in the transport sector. The Transport Business Plan is fundamentally split into two key areas of activity:

• Delivery: Delivery of funded local transport programmes within SCR control.

• Strategy and Policy: Preparation for transformational future programmes

o Influencing national agencies on key external infrastructure projects such as High Speed Rail and Transport for the North

o Refreshing the SCR Transport Strategy to reflect transport priorities and current transport landscape.

Objectives

SCR will have a transport network that supports sustainable and inclusive economic growth.

Our allocated resources will extract maximum value from the SCR’s active participation in the Northern Powerhouse, from our targeted economic growth areas and from High Speed Rail. This will include a connected transport system fit for the 21st century, and economic master-planning to exploit the game changing connectivity that high speed rail will bring to the Sheffield City Region.

We will focus our effort on securing investment in connectivity that links our key centres to each other, to key growth locations and to other parts of the UK and abroad, maximising the benefits of this with complementary sustainable transport solutions that connect people to opportunities and promote a high quality of life.

To achieve this ambition we will further explore the options associated with the SCR devolution deal.

1.2 Investments supporting operational objectives The list below highlights the diversity and significance of the investment that will be directed at the SCR transport sector over the plan period. The TEB will be responsible for shaping the following key activities.

STRATEGY AND POLICY

National Infrastructure Projects

• Transport for the North

o TfN will be investing £12.5M in the development of multi-modal connectivity enhancements across the North, there is a considerable policy remit for SCR to influence this work and be an advocate for a strong proportion for investment within the SCR that will benefit our economy. In total Government will spend £13bn on Transport for the North infrastructure this parliament, SCR are at the heart of shaping this work as one of the five core city regions within the Northern Powerhouse SCR will seek to influence and resource the delivery of the Northern Transport Strategy (2016), to ensure that the SCR priorities are reflected in the TfN priorities to gain the maximum amount of available funding.

o SCR will identify and sponsor a major TfN workstream (to be agreed) as part of revised TfN governance arrangements.

o SCR will be the Accountable Body for TfN until TfN becomes a statutory organisation in 2017. This means SCR will receive the TfN grant from Government and contracts with suppliers on behalf of the TfN partnership1.

• Strategic Trans Pennine Connections

o Linked to the above, SCR will develop, assess and make the case for new Trans-Pennine connections, including a Trans-Pennine tunnel and strategic connections to it from within SCR.

• High Speed Rail

o Through further development of connectivity packages connecting urban centres and key growth locations throughout the Sheffield City Region thereby ensuring that the SCR is in the best position possible before and after an autumn announcement on route and stations by government.

o Explore and discuss funding opportunities with HS2 Ltd and Department for Transport

o Negotiating the requirements for the Hybrid Bill preparation

o Input into HS2 East, ensuring the eastern leg of the HS2 route is strongly supported by partners along the route

SCR Transformational Projects

• Devolution Deal2

o Developing the principles agreed in the Devolution Deal

1 It must be noted that SCR is ‘handling’ TfN funds whilst ensuring that the SCR is not exposed to any financial risk 2 Transport is one of five key areas within the Devolution Deal, covering arrange of activity from the Bus Franchising to the consolidation and management of devolved transport budgets.

o Establishing the opportunities, benefits and risks of implementing each of the Deal components

Bus franchising Control of local key route network Devolved planning powers (Transport and Works Act)

• SCR Transport Strategy and Vision Development

o Refreshing the SCR Transport Strategy to reflect recent opportunities, joining together

other transport and economy workstreams with a common vision for improving connectivity

o Through the refreshed Transport Strategy set policy direction that reflects the changing transport environment in terms of governance and funding

o Set the policy direction for SYPTE to shape its Business Plan and budget

• Sheffield City Region Integrated Infrastructure Plan (SCR IIP)

o Supporting solution development and making the case for the transport proposals in

response to the SCR IIP. The SCR IIP sets out clearly defined transport network challenges and spatial packages that include transport interventions (such as the 20 corridors expected to experience the greatest increase in congestion). SCR must now develop the specific solutions to address these challenges.

o Specific challenges and opportunities to which transport infrastructure will be required are detailed in the emerging SCR IIP, which will be published in Spring/Summer 2016.

o SCR must ensure strong links between the SCR IIP and the SCR Transport Strategy Refresh under development.

• Strategic Rail

o Through engagement with Rail North Ltd, development of a Rail Plan that sets out our ambitions for rail in the SCR through the existing franchises.

o Influencing investment on the Midland Mainline, East Coast Mainline and Trans Pennine routes.

• SCR as an International Gateway

o Support Doncaster Sheffield Airport as a key international gateway by developing the case for enhanced connections to it. This includes supporting the development and delivery of an airport railway station.

• Connectivity to Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District (AMID)

o Develop connectivity solutions for the AMID, linked to its future masterplan and level of ambition. This will include investigation of heavy rail / tram train options.

DELIVERY

SCR Enabling Projects

• Sustainable and Inclusive Transport

o Oversee delivery of the Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP) to enhance sustainable travel options in SCR, aligning investment in capital and revenue activity

o Given that revenue funding has ceased on Local Sustainable Transport Fund activity, the SCR will look to bid for future funding to support this type of activity as funding options become available

o Investigating opportunities though devolution to deliver a targeted cycling action plan.

o On February 15th DfT issued invitations for local transport authorities to bid for revenue through the Sustainable Travel Transition Year Revenue Competition 2016/17. This fund will provide revenue to continue to support capital investments in cycling and walking initiatives, bridging the gap between the expiry of the LSTF in March 2016 and the implementation of the Access Fund in 2017. South Yorkshire partners are currently preparing a submission for TEB approval prior to the deadline of 29th March.

• Environmental Sustainability

o Securing funding and flexibility from Government to invest in low emission vehicles and infrastructure - principally this will be delivered through an Office of Low Emission Vehicles funding competition and further devolution negotiations

• Local Transport Plan

o Oversee delivery of schemes against the annual Integrated Transport Block allocation. Activities led by the four local authorities and SYPTE to address local transport issues including traffic management, safer roads, accessibility, air quality, sustainability and major scheme planning

• Highways Maintenance

o Oversee the Highways Capital Maintenance Block: Activities are defined by the local priorities including carriageway and footway maintenance, lighting and bridge assessment and strengthening. SCC does not currently receive an allocation as their maintenance programme is delivered through the PFI.

2. What are our key Milestones in 2016/17? Theme Milestones 2016/17

Apr 16 May 16 June 16 July 16 Aug 16 Sept 16

Oct 16 Nov 16 Dec 16 Jan 17 Feb 17 March 17

STRATEGY AND POLICY Transport for the North

Northern Transport Strategy Published Support/Influence Programme and Strategic Assessment Framework development

Influence rail sequence 2 outputs and check technical work against SCR demand Influence the next stage of rail sequence workstream. Support Network Rail and HS2 as required to progress to delivery

Strategic Local connectivity scheme options complete

Develop detail of schemes and influence TfN to secure future delivery

Consultation on TP Tunnel Option

TP Tunnel Business Case Development and publication Respond to queries and support Government decision

High Speed Rail Feedback into

HS1\HS2 study undertaken by Pteg/TfL.

Commence connectivity discussions with DfT and HS2

Communicate SCR requirements to DfT Govt Phase 2 announcement (potential)

Govt Phase 2 announcement (potential)

Govt Phase 2 announcement (potential)

Strategic Roads SCR respond to HE

Consultation on Road Investment Strategy

2

A57/A628 Trans-

Pennine Route Study

outcomes

Development of

MOU with Highways England

Strategic Rail Start of new

Northern and Transpennine

Franchise

Update SCR Rail Plan

Various Rail Network

Study completion dates (TBC)

HLOS for Control Period 6

(TBC)

SYPTE Policy Position

Determine SYPTE Policy to shape SYPTE

Business Plan

SCR Transport Strategy

Internal SCR

consultation

Draft public

consultation

document agreed

Public consulta

tion

Public consultation

response TEB Sign off CA Sign off Publish

Theme Milestones 2016/17 Apr 16 May 16 June 16 July 16 Aug 16 Sept

16 Oct 16 Nov 16 Dec 16 Jan 17 Feb 17 March 17

SCR Modelling Strategy

SCR

Mandate approved

Outline Business

Case Approved

Final Business Case Approv

ed

SCR Award Approved Delivery

Bus Franchising

Scoping note and Mandate to explore

options Business Case for Bus Devolution / Partnerships

Recommendation to TEB to

seek approval from CA to begin the

implementation of the

preferred delivery model

Devolution Deal – Highways ‘Key Route’ Powers

TEB consideration of the Local Highway

Authorities and Highways England

views alongside the priorities for the

Combined Authority

Key Route network

map

Further consultation with partners

Recommendation to CA on the proposed Key

Route Network and associated collaboration agreement

Devolution Deal – Infrastructure Planning Powers

Review of powers

with legal advice to confirm

the extent of the

opportunity

Presentation of the options for further consideration

Theme Milestones 2016/17 Apr 16 May 16 June 16 July 16 Aug 16 Sept

16 Oct 16 Nov 16 Dec 16 Jan 17 Feb 17 March 17

DELIVERY Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme

Meadowhall P&R Extension (PTE)

Implementation (completion April 2017) (subject to funding)

Chesterfield Road Key Route (PTE)

Implementation Completion

Trans Pennine Trail Enhancements (DMBC)

Delivery: Scheme commenced implementation in August 15 and will be complete November 2017

Doncaster Town Centre Cycle Connections (DMBC)

Scheme Design Implementation (completion March 2018)

Cycle Routes Lower Don Valley (RMBC)

Implementation Completion

Rotherham Town Centre Cycle and Ped Access (RMBC)

Implementation (commenced September 2015) Completion

Cycle Routes Lower Don Valley (SCC)

Implementing Phase 1 Phase 2 Scheme Design Implementation

(completion March 2018)

Cycle Routes Upper Don Valley (SCC)

Implementing Phase 1 Phase 2 Feasibility Phase 2 Design

Sheffield City Centre Cycle Routes (SCC)

Design Implementation Completion

Blackburn Valley Cycle Route (SCC)

Implementation (completion January 2018)

South Sheffield Cycle Route Feasibility Design

Implementation (completion March 2018) Barnsley Junction 38 Cycle Route

Design Implementation (Project programme being agreed) Completion

3. What outcomes and outputs will be generated by the end of 2016/17? 3.1 Approach

The Transport Business Plan is predominantly focused on policy outputs to shape national infrastructure delivery. As such, the majority of the outputs and outcomes will be realised in the long term (for example, the delivery of the HS2 connectivity package). The CA needs to invest in policy work and associated studies to significantly increase the likelihood that SCR will achieve its local ambitions. Whilst the outcomes of our policy work will not manifest in 2016/17, by completing the policy work now, we will secure and shape their future delivery.

3.2 Deliverables

In terms of programmes that will be delivered within 2016/17 – The TEB will be responsible for overseeing delivery of the Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP), secured through the SCR Growth Deal. The TEB will be responsible for overseeing delivery of the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and highways maintenance pot (currently delivered by the Transport Committee) and any other successful funding bids.

The table overleaf highlights the outputs and outcomes (note that many are policy based). For further detail of the policy outputs, please refer to Appendix 1.

Overall, the focus of the TEB in terms of outcomes will be as follows:

• National infrastructure projects that support local ambitions

• Develop and provide the transport connections to unlock and drive sustainable growth in SCR

o Improve productivity by reducing delays in our strategic network

• Offer a more integrated transport network

o Greater patronage and satisfaction in SCR Public Transport networks

• A more inclusive and robust transport network

o Enhanced accessibility to work and training across SCR

• A more environmentally sustainable transport network

o Reduced emissions from transport

o Higher business satisfaction with SCR as a place (clean and innovative business environment)

Q1 Apr-Jun 2016 Q2 Jul-Sept 2016 Q3 Oct-Dec 2016 Q4 Jan-Mar 2017

LOCA

L TR

ANSP

ORT

PLA

N

Outputs aligned to SCR Transport Strategy

Local safety schemes, crossing improvements, primary route network enhancements and public transport system improvements. Exact outputs to be determined through partnership prioritisation once funding is fully approved.

DELI

VERY

- ST

EP

New and improved cycle routes (km)

21.9km of new and improved cycle lanes or cycling priority measures delivered in 2016/17

New or improved footways (km)

13.5km of new or improved footways delivered in 2016/17

New or improved crossings (units)

17 new or improved crossings delivered in 2016/17

Highway junctions (units)

1 new or improved highway junction delivered in 2016/17

Park and Ride (units)

1 new (expanded) Park and Ride (Meadowhall) (completion 2017/18)

New bus lane (km)

0.3km of new bus lane delivered in 2016/17

Transport for the North

Conditional outputs are frequent rail connections of 30 minutes journey time from SCR to Leeds, Manchester, Manchester Airport, 60 min to Hull and 90 min to Newcastle. Delivery timescales TBC (beyond 2017)

Decision on Trans-Pennine Tunnel

HS2 HS2 outputs (including approx. 1 hour journey time from Sheffield to London) are planned to be delivered in 2033. A key focus for SCR is developing and seeking funding for a comprehensive connectivity package

Government Decision on Phase 2 of HS2

Roads Highways England Road Investment Strategy 1: HE deliverables

• M1 Junctions 32-35A – upgrading the M1 to Smart Motorway, including the use of hard-shoulder running, between junction 32 (M18 interchange) and junction 35A (A616) around Sheffield and Rotherham – (Started Jan 2105 – Completion March 2017)

• A61 Dualling – dualling of the A61 north of Sheffield between the A616 roundabout and junction 36 of the M1 (Delivery Timescales TBC)

The outcomes will be firmed up by June 2016 once information is known from external agencies and strategy development work and scoping documents have been produced.

4. What are the risks and how will we mitigate them? The SCR has developed a comprehensive risk register for the TEB. This was presented at the January TEB for discussion and will form the basis of this section of the plan.

Risk Mitigating Action By When

Transport for the North TfN programme does not reflect SCR priorities Engagement at all levels to ensue SCR is fully reflected Apr-16

High Speed Rail Sheffield City Region does not come to a common view on Station Location, resulting in the decision being made by the Secretary of State. SCR not carried out preparatory work to influence investment in transport connectivity.

SCR carries out work to put it in the best position ahead of government announcement on route and stations that will inform future growth strategy around the station.

Spring 2016

Devolution Deal Difference of opinion on how to deliver the transport component of the devolution deal

Strong partner engagement through the TEB and supporting structures

On-going

Strategic Rail Transition of management of franchises from DfT to Rail North does not provide local control and input

Formal establishment of the DfT participation in Rail North processes through the SCR’s role as a Director and through officer groups.

On-going

The overlap between Rail North and TfN could result in conflicting priorities

Ensure SCR has a consistent message on our priorities. On-going

Franchise outcomes do not deliver improvements for SCR

On-going engagement with DfT and franchise operators to influence their investment plans

Apr-16

Inability of the rail industry to delivery infrastructure to the SCR rail network, both committed schemes and new proposals

SCR Rail plan setting out necessary interventions to support economic growth, backed by evidence. Close monitoring of scheme delivery through participation in rail industry processes.

Apr-16

Strategic Highways Highways England fail to engage with SCR on Memorandum of Understanding

On-going discussion with HE and Government departments to deliver on devolution commitment

Mar-17

Input on Route Investment Strategy not reflected in final document

Proactive engagement with HE to ensure they are fully aware of SCR’s requirements

Mar-16

Sustainable and inclusive Transport and Air Quality

Widening transport policy development across SCR not integrated with Local Transport Authorities in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire

Engagement with all SCR transport authorities to ensure a common purpose

Mar-16

Competitive bidding to secure funds limits our ability to make a long-term financial commitment

Seeking longer-term funding through devolution and direct engagement with Government

Mar-16

Evidence that underpins investment relies on modelled information

Ensure that the information and assumptions that underpin the modelling are as robust as possible given available data.

On-going

Project Risks STEP and other programmes project risk are set out in project by project pro formas

On-going

SCR Transport Strategy SCR open to challenge regarding how up to date the strategy is

Seek to refresh in an efficient manner. Previous policy commitments are still valid despite changing context

Summer 2016

Significant cost of model development and maintenance

Manage down the scope of model develop to focus on the critical issues whilst ensuring that assurance is fit for purpose

Spring 2016

Transport Modelling Strategy Lack of internal expertise to influence the strategy

Use of a critical friend to review the proposed strategy April 2016

5. What are the resource requirements? • Budget for schemes which are live and subject to forward funding commitments

• Budget to deliver the identified scheme pipeline

• Budget requests to develop new activity, subject to approval of the scheme at OBC and FBC.

Transport Executive Board Budget Proposal

Programme Project / Scheme Funding Source Status Funding Type 16/17 (000)

17/18 (000)

18/19 (000)

DELIVERY

Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP) Delivery of STEP Growth Deal 2 /

LGF Allocated Capital 3,300 8,000 5,000

Low Emission Buses Clean Bus Technology Fund: SCR successful. Project will be delivered by SYPTE DfT 16/17 Secured Capital 500

(1,827) awaiting DfT

decision)

(1,495) awaiting DfT

decision)

Rail Replacement Rail Replacement (2015/16 delivery target)

Growth Deal 2 / LGF Allocated Capital 1,000 Total costs to 2020:

18,000 (unfunded)

STRATEGY AND POLICY

Budget identified by SCR Finance for 2016/17

TFN Consultancy: Technical evidence and policy documents that set out the ambition for TFN city connectivity

TBC No Revenue

1503

50 50

HS2 Support the development and future implementation of the HS2 connectivity package. TBC No Revenue 200 300 150

Sustainable Transport Support development of sustainable transport package and securing funding Core Cost No Revenue 50

Urban Mobility and Innovation Identification and exploitation of innovation opportunities in partnership with Transport Systems Catapult, Universities and industry.

Development of an urban mobility and innovation strategy

Core Cost No Revenue 20

Engagement and influencing national infrastructure agency

Establish and coordinate an SCR approach to the engagement and influencing of Highways England and their investment priorities

Core Cost No Revenue 30

Budget Request 5,250

Total Revenue 450

Total Capital 4,800

3 TfN Rail: 50k, Freight: 20k, City Connectivity: 50k, Strategic Economic Case: 30k

This table highlights any activity that is a priority and for which there is no current identified funding source

Transport Executive Board additional capital resource request

Programme Project Funding Source Status Funding Type 16/17 17/18 18/19

DELIVERY

STEP Continuation of the existing sustainable travel programme Gainshare / LGF Unresourced SEP priority

Capital and Revenue TBC TBC £4m

STRATEGY AND POLICY

Important to make the case for funding these important priorities following the SCR decision on devolution,

Planning Growth Area connectivity studies: Including developing connectivity solution for AMID and for the RHADS growth area Core Cost No Revenue 150

Strategic Development of the SCR Transport Strategy Refresh Core Cost No Revenue 100 50 50

Support Responsive Consultancy Support – Capacity to respond to Government funding opportunities as they emerge Core Cost No Revenue 75 75 75

Modelling Refresh the baseline of the SCR models and deliver the Modelling Strategy LGF Unresourced SEP

priority Capital and

Revenue £1m £1m 0

Trans Pennine Consultancy support to develop wider connectivity to/from Trans Pennine Tunnel from within SCR Gainshare Unresourced SEP

priority Revenue £100k £100k £100k

Sustainable and Inclusive Cycling – Deliver the Cycle Action Plan Gainshare / LGF Unresourced SEP


Revenue TBC: Resourcing to be agreed with

partners

Bus Services Fund to support bus access to areas of key economic significance Gainshare / LGF Unresourced SEP


Revenue 1m 1m 1m

Devolution Making the case for bus devolution/partnerships and SCR input into highway key route network Single Pot No Revenue 150 250 250

The above table details proposals for programmes the Executive Board would seek funding for, subject to compliance with the SCR Assurance and Accountability Framework should SCR receive £30m additional funding per annum.

Outputs and Outcomes by Workstream STRATEGY AND POLICY

Workstream

Inputs Outputs Outcomes Benefits Transport Strategy Policy and SEP link

Transport for the North: SCR forms part of an interconnected Northern Powerhouse, with rapid multimodal connections to key Northern Cities.

Overall £15 billion Transport for the North funding package from Central Government £12.5 million settlement from Central Government to deliver the first wave of outputs for each respective Workstream

Strategy • Updated Northern

Transport Strategy (to be published 2016)

• Appraisal, assurance and prioritisation arrangements developed to align with, and form key delivery mechanism for SCR ambitions.

Workstreams • Rail • Highways • Freight (support

Northern Freight and Logistics Strategy)

• SMART • Strategic Case • Local Connectivity:

including assessment of bus, current Supertram, tram-train, tram extensions, local rail and other mass transit requirements

• Aviation Evidence • Case Making: Provide

£44 billion additional GVA for the North (£1,600 per individual), building on a strong economy already worth £290 billion GVA. Strategic Economic Case currently being developed to quantify SCR benefits

SCR businesses better connected to business and skills markets in Leeds, Manchester and other key northern cities. National economy rebalanced, with greater productivity resulting from the north. Historical connectivity barriers (such as slow/unreliable SCR links to Manchester) removed to enable greater productivity / economic integration

A Improve surface access to international gateways B Input to and shape Highways England’s Route Investment Strategy 2 C Promote efficient and sustainable means of freight distribution, while growing SCR’s logistics sector E Ensure High Speed Rail is part of a Trans-North network F Improve connectivity between key locations O Ensure SMART ticketing is developed and delivered in SCR

evidence to support the case for TfN interventions

• Support TfN workstreams in undertaking rail / highways / freight and logistics / SMART studies to understand options and requirements.

Accountable Body • The oversight of the

procurement and financial processes relating to TfN

Workstream

Inputs Outputs Outcomes Benefits Transport Strategy and SEP

Policy link Trans Pennine Connectivity: Linked to the work on TfN, SCR will develop, assess and make the case for new Trans-Pennine connections, including a Trans-Pennine tunnel and strategic connections to it from within SCR.

Overall £15 billion Transport for the North funding package from Central Government Highways England Strategic study commissioned by DfT (with TfN) – Interim Report released November 2015

Highways England Strategic study commissioned by DfT (with TfN) – Final Report due autumn 2016. SCR to feed into this process through TfN. Develop and assess the case for connections to the tunnel through the SCR, with a view to maximising the benefit unlocking employment, and supporting business and

Faster and more resilient connections between SCR and Manchester.

Benefits of inter-city connections felt across the region. Support key sectors including freight and logistics.

B Input to and shape Highways England’s Route Investment Strategy 2 C Promote efficient and sustainable means of freight distribution, while growing SCR’s logistics sector F Improve connectivity between key locations

freight routes.

Workstream

Inputs Outputs Outcomes Benefits Transport Strategy and SEP Policy link

High Speed Rail: A locally and nationally agreed HS2 proposition, including comprehensive, funded, 21st Century, multi-modal connectivity programme, station requirements and Masterplan to deliver wider growth.

• Central

Government Connectivity funding is to be confirmed

• Government decision on station location is also pending

• Secure local and

national agreement on SCR station location

• Develop compelling, deliverable connectivity package to maximise the benefits of HS2 and the surrounding growth area.

• Coordinate HS2 East • Connectivity Package

(1) Define priorities (2) Agree priorities (3) Secure funding for connectivity package (4) Deliver on time

Wider economic benefits of £400m direct to the SCR. HS2 will free up space on existing rail lines. These benefits are expected to total £800m as extra capacity enables workers to access more productive jobs Cuts journey times between SCR and London by 40+%

SCR served by HS2 in 2033 HS2 accessible from across the region. Connections act as growth enabler and accelerator in the HS2 zone.

A Improve surface access to international gateways E Ensure SCR is served by High Speed Rail F Improve connectivity between major settlements

Workstream


Devolution Deal: Key principles have been agreed for increased transport freedoms and flexibilities (see outputs and outcomes). These are to be driven forward by SCR.

• Control of the

powers and resources for the bus network in South Yorkshire, including the potential to franchise

• Provide modelling and

other evidence to inform decision on bus devolution

The Buses Bill will allow the SCR to introduce a bus franchise model if it wishes to do so. At this point in time the geography for this work is South Yorkshire with cross boundary services being taken into consideration. This will allow SCR to (a) assess whether the current Partnerships, and those currently under consideration, deliver the desired outcomes, (b) to bolster the persuasive effects that the threat of franchising on operator service provision.

G Deliver interventions required for development and regeneration K Develop public transport that connects people to jobs and training in both urban and rural areas M Ensure our networks are well-maintained N Develop user-friendly public transport, covering all parts of

services or modify partnerships.

SCR, with high quality of integration between different modes

• The identification of a Key Route Network of local authority roads that will be collaboratively managed and maintained

• Identification of an SCR ‘Key Route Network’

All local roads are currently managed by the Local Highways Authority; there may be significant benefit from a more coordinated SCR approach for strategic management, maintenance and funding on the SCR’s strategic network.

• Government Commitment to explore options to give more planning powers over the delivery of transport schemes

• Investigate and consider the advantages and disadvantages of localising the Transport and Works Act Order legal process

This could provide an opportunity to speed up the development stages of delivering major transport investment, particularly relating to Transport for the North/High Speed Rail connectivity interventions/potential Tram Train and Tram extensions.

• Re-stated commitment from Government to deliver Transport for the North and HS2 and Northern

• Will be progressed through TfN and HS2 workstreams.

HM Treasury analysis shows that realising the ambition to rebalance the UK economy would be worth an additional £44 billion (in real terms) to the northern economy. Investment in SCR connections to key northern cities is a key requirement to enable this growth. The eastern leg of the HS2 link is forecast to deliver £2.6bn of productivity benefits

Powerhouse Rail in SCR

and 3.6m jobs.

• Smart ‘oyster style’ ticketing

• Will be progressed through the TfN work stream and potentially enhanced through a bus franchise model.

Evidence tells us that customers demand a more integrated offer and ticketing is a key part of this. Evidence from other major cities demonstrates the benefit of smart ticketing as part of a 21st Century customer offer.

• A consolidated, devolved transport budget, with a multi-year settlement to be agreed at SCR to form part of the ‘Single Pot’

• TEB to consider investment in transport from the single pot and other sources. This will be developed through the Business Case development process.

• Update on the funding included into a single pot will be provided following the Spending Review

Currently Government funding comes from individual discrete pots and often come through competitive funding bids. The devolution deal allows funding certainly of a longer horizon and flexibility to spend on activity that delivers the best benefit for the SCR local needs. Flexibility to have both capital and revenue funding that reflect that a successful transport system requires both types of funding.

Workstream


Strategic Rail To work with Rail North, Network Rail, The Office of Rail Regulation and the Department for Transport to achieve rail provision that

• Network Rail

Control Period 5 programme

• Rail North processes

• ORR Periodic Review process

• Network Rail

• Ensure timely delivery

and full realisation of SCR benefits on NR projects including:

- Northern Hub - East Coast Mainline - Midland Mainline

Electrification - Other NR improvement

projects

Better connectivity, a more coherent and user friendly network, with increased, faster journeys, more capacity and greater cost effectiveness. More and better trains on local rail

Both passenger and freight traffic expected to increase by 30% nationally, over the next 10 years. Delivering our objectives will ensure SCR is an attractive and well connected place for

A Improve surface access to international gateways D Improve rail services and access to stations, focusing on interventions that can be delivered in the short term F Improve connectivity between major settlements

matches the SCR’s economic aspirations

Long-term Planning Process

• Passenger Rail Franchising, particularly Northern and Trans-pennine Express

• Local Initiatives

• Represent SCR

throughout Network Rail’s Long Term Planning Process.

• Support Rail North activity. Produce Long Term Rail Strategy Progress Report and prepare for 2016 version.

• Refresh SCR Rail Plan

to capture strategic objectives and strengthen evidence.

• Support Doncaster in the preparation of its Rail Strategy.

• Strategic input into

development of Rotherham Parkgate Study following Rotherham Connectivity Study – engage DfT and operators

• Complete study into

case for main line platforms at Dore and Totley and progress findings

services Faster journeys from Sheffield to London New trains introduced on East Coast services that provide faster journeys, more seats and the potential for new destinations to be served Address capacity at Doncaster and Sheffield Stations Ensure that future electrification and other scheme programme reflect Electrification Task Force outputs

business.

• Support other rail activities such as Network Rail studies:

- ECML Route

Study - North of England

Route Study - Sheffield Study

Workstream


Strategic Highways Greater influence and engagement with Highways England to better drive forward SCR priorities.

• Devolution

deal provides the basis for engaging with Highways England

• Formal agreement

between SCR CA and Highways England to work cooperatively in developing investment priorities for the Strategic Road Network

• Develop and secure solutions to address key constraints on the strategic highway network, including at M1 Junction 33 and 34.

Supports key future development sites such as Markham Vale (700 jobs), Waverley/AMP (3000 jobs, 4000 homes) and Lower Don Valley (4000 jobs 1300 homes). The M18 provides access to key growth locations at Rossington Inland Port and associated housing development (8800 jobs by 2021 and 1,500 houses) and RHADS (10,200 jobs by 2021).

Long-term commitments to focusing investment from a national body on infrastructure that can support local economic growth

B Improve the reliability and resilience of the national road network using a range of management measures F Improve connectivity between major settlements

Workstream


Doncaster Sheffield Airport Connectivity Support development and make the case for short, medium and long term solutions for enhancing connectivity to the airport, including a focus on providing an attractive rail offer.

Section 106 Commitment for airport railway station

• Support development of short, medium and long term options for connectivity to the airport – including rail options (on Lincoln Line and ECML)

• Support the

development proposals for an airport rail station

• Investigate other public

transport improvements to the airport site

• Support progression of

options through SCR appraisal and assurance processes as required

Support growth of the airport and delivery of its masterplan by providing attractive connections.

Support growth within the Airport Corridor Growth Area. Develop the airport as a key international gateway to the UK

Improve surface access to international gateways D Improve rail services and access to stations, focusing on interventions that can be delivered in the short term F Improve connectivity between major settlements

Workstream


Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District Connectivity Develop solutions for strategic access into the AMID, including

Centre for Cities, report on the AMID Vision Oxford Economics Evidence Base Masterplanning for the AMID

• Develop evidenced

options for connectivity to the AMID – including consideration of heavy rail tram train.

• Support progression of options through SCR

Provide transport connectivity that provides a step change in the current offer and unlocks the growth potential of the area.

Unlock the full growth potential of the AMID

F Improve connectivity between major settlements Improve surface access to international gateways D Improve rail services and access to stations Connect to SEP Growth Areas

consideration of heavy rail/tram train options

being developed (led by Creative Sheffield)

appraisal and assurance processes as required

New Government Transport Funding Respond to emerging and as yet undefined calls for new government funding

• Govt. announced ring-fenced aspect of the LGF, of £475 million centrally, for large transport schemes. More information on how this fund will work will be released in early 2016.

• Other funds as yet unknown

• Large Transport Schemes Funding will be used to unlock economic growth and housing across the country, with local areas bidding for capital funding for development and construction of large transport projects that are too big to be funded through regular LGF. SCR to identify schemes and bid accordingly.

• Prioritised transformational schemes and funding secured

Drive economic growth through transformational investment

All SCR Transport Strategy policies supported, particularly policies F and G – Supporting growth through enhanced connectivity.

Strategic Planning: Support strategic land use planning across SCR authorities

• All SCR Local

Authorities are developing Local Plans

• Increased call for SCR spatial picture and fulfilment of Duty to Cooperate

• Support SCR spatial

planning activity

• Provide feedback on key strategic planning applications

• Input to SCR Local

Plans, providing evidence as required

Compelling land use plans linked to SCR economic and place ambition

Increased certainty to attract inward investment and shape SCR.

Particularly relevant to policy: I To focus new development along existing public transport corridors and in places adjacent to existing shops and services

SCR Transport Strategy Refresh and SCR Transport Vision Clear strategic direction, affirming SCR Transport priorities.

• Support the

development of an implementation plan to invest £8.7m of Local Transport Plan funding

• Develop and publish a

clear long term vision to guide the SCR Transport Strategy

• Finalise and publish the SCR Transport Strategy Refresh.

• Strategy to inform SCR promoter response to the challenges and opportunities set out in the Integrated Infrastructure Plan.

Shape future direction of transport and inform scheme promoters.

To be determined through strategy development process

A refreshed transport strategy will drive the delivery of transport interventions linked to SEP priorities

Workstream

Inputs Outputs Outcomes Benefits Support to policy areas

SCR Integrated Infrastructure Plan: An integrated infrastructure strategy and commissioning model to support the delivery of the SEP.

• Strategic

Economic Plan commitment to a multi-sector, integrated infrastructure plan

• Single Pot commitment to drive forward infrastructure priorities

•

Support commissioning process to support promoters in delivering SCR transport priorities Comprehensive economic modelling that provides evidence for infrastructure requirements.

Comprehensive, integrated transport network

Clear, long term, integrated approach to infrastructure to support delivery of the SEP. Overcome c£40 billion in lost productivity due to congestion over the next 60 years.

Transport infrastructure improvements will support achievement across all areas of the SCR Transport Strategy.

Setting SYPTE Policy Direction Set the SYPTE policy direction in early 2016 to shape its business planning activity

• SCR

Business Plan

• Emerging position on Transport Strategy Refresh

Set clear policy direction for PTE through emerging operational transport policies

SYPTE clearly briefed on emerging operational priorities

SYPTE can target delivery activity according to emerging SCR operational priorities

Will allow support to all operational transport policy areas.

Workstream


Young Person’s Travel Action Plan: A plan setting out the SCR approach to delivering a quality transport offer for young people

• Draft action

plan developed by SCR and consultants to identify priorities

• Targeted ticketing products developed by SYPTE with key youth stakeholders.

Gain policy support for, publish and promote the Young Person’s Travel Action Plan. Establish programme for delivery.

Attractive public transport offer to support young people in fulfilling economic potential.

Overcome youth unemployment challenges. Improve access to work and training. Gain strong future public transport customer base.

N Develop user-friendly public transport, covering all parts of SCR, with high quality of integration between different modes T Provide information and travel advice for the users of all modes of transport, so that they can make informed travel choices

SCR Modelling Strategy: A strategy capturing SCR’s modelling requirements and

• Develop a

comprehensive modelling strategy.

• Deliver modelling

Estimated £2m funding from a number of sources TBC, subject to board decision to progress the strategy

Modelling requirements to be identified through the strategy development process.

Strategic intelligence to support SCR scheme development and decision making.

A robust modelling framework will help ensure SCR interventions and investment based on strong evidence base, to best drive growth.

tools for supporting future growth.

required to support strategy development.

Updated area wide multi modal transport models as required

Workstream


Evaluation: Undertake monitoring and evaluation for schemes as required under terms of Government Grants.

• Bus Rapid

Transit ex-post evaluation

• Better Bus Area 2 and Local Sustainable Transport Fund 2 monitoring and ex-post evaluation

These are required under the terms associated with the Government Grants. As well as fulfilling a contractual requirement, the outputs will provide valuable intelligence to aid future planning activities.

Satisfy funding agents and identify impacts of interventions.

Strong evidence base to understand and demonstrate the impacts of our investment.

Comprehensive project evaluation will provide a strong evidence base, to best drive growth as well as satisfying contractual requirements to secure funding.

Transport Executive Board: Ongoing support the Transport Executive Board to ensure well informed decisions.

• 5 Executive

Boards established to support SCR Combined Authority – Including Transport

Establish and support board as required, in accordance with Terms of Reference and Forward Plan (to be agreed) SCR will report Business Plan delivery progress to the TEB on an ongoing basis.

Strong governance supporting Combined Authority decision making.

Relevant to all areas of the SCR Transport Strategy

DELIVERY Workstream

Inputs Outputs Outcomes Benefits Transport Strategy Policy and

SEP link Sustainable and Inclusive Transport Delivery of the Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme (STEP) then building on this to support strategic investment in sustainable transport.

• 16.3m Local

Growth Funding

• Growth Deal round 2 funding to be confirmed

• For 2015/16 we have

defined a programme of investment that will unblock our key local constraints and promote an attractive business environment.

• The programme is being developed by the four South Yorkshire Transport Authorities and SYPTE. This is coordinated by the LTP partnership.

• Further development of the sustainable transport offer is needed. This development has been set out in the Devolution Deal were SCR is seeking both capital and revenue funds to continue this activity.

Once the STEP programme is agreed the outcomes of this programme can be confirmed.

Our forecast benefits for our first LSTF programme were significant, with the total benefits to business users and operators exceeding £98m over the 60-year appraisal period. The shift towards walking and cycling leads to a considerable benefit of £77m due to improved physical fitness. In addition, there are also high benefits to commuters and other users.

H Develop high-quality public places K Develop public transport that connects people to jobs and training N Develop user-friendly public transport, covering all parts of SCR, with high quality of integration between different modes R Work to improve the efficiency of all vehicles and reduce their carbon emissions S Encourage active travel and develop high-quality cycling and walking networks T Provide information and travel advice for the users of all modes of transport, so that they can make informed travel choices

Local Transport Plan Oversee delivery of schemes against the annual Integrated Transport Block allocation

£8.428m annual allocation

• Range of outputs determined by local priorities but all aligned to the SCR Transport Strategy. Includes, but not limited to, new or improved junctions & crossings, length of

Range of outcomes determined by local priorities but all aligned to the SCR Transport Strategy. Includes, but not limited to, network reliability, reductions

Benefits realised through the resolution of local transport issues. Individual schemes are on a smaller scale which limit the capacity for

All interventions are assessed to ensure they align with policies identified within the strategy, specific alignments will be determined by the detail of the actual interventions developed following approval.

cycle lane/tracks, improved bus priority measures and air quality improvement initiatives.

in casualties, satisfaction with public transport and mode share of journeys to urban centres.

calculating specific benefit cost ratios

Highways Maintenance: Oversee the Highways Capital Maintenance Block: Activities are defined by the local priorities including carriageway and footway maintenance, lighting and bridge assessment and strengthening.

£11.522m

• Footway maintenance schemes, carriageway maintenance schemes, bridge assessment and strengthening, lighting improvements

Improved condition of principal roads, journey reliability of the strategic network, satisfaction with network performance, casualty reduction.

Individual schemes are on a smaller scale which limit the capacity for calculating specific benefit cost ratios

Improved reliability, connectivity and accessibility. Exact details determined by individual interventions

1. Issue

1.1. This paper updates the Combined Authority on developments of Rail North and seeks agreement on a Deputy Director for Rail North.

2. Recommendations

2.1. The Combined Authority is recommended to note the content of this report.

2.2. The Combined Authority recommended to agree a Deputy Director of Rail North.


3.1. Rail North has been working to secure better rail services in the North for several years. Rail North is a partnership of 29 Local Transport Authorities in the North. Rail North

Summary

• Rail North is the activity led by 29 Local Transport Authorities in the North to secure better rail services, initially focussed on the new Northern and Transpennine Express Franchises due to start on 1 April 2016. Both franchises will be managed through a Partnership Agreement signed by the Secretary of State for Transport and Rail North, by a new team based in Leeds.

• Arriva will operate the new Northern Franchise and First Group the new Transpennine Express Franchise. Both franchises will deliver significant investment including over 500 new rail vehicles, withdrawal of all pacer trains and complete refurbishment of remaining diesel trains. There will be significant enhanced services and investment in stations. These improvements reflect the influence of Rail North on the franchising process, and its desire to see a transformation in rail in the North, based on its 20 year Long Term Rail Strategy.

• The governance arrangements for Rail North are being put in place. This includes the Members Agreement that the Combined Authority has previously agreed to sign, and the way that Rail North is funded. Recruitment to the posts in the Rail North Team is now underway.

• The Combined Authority has a nominated Director on the Rail North Ltd Board. Rail North has asked all Directors to have a named deputy. The Combined Authority is therefore asked to agree a deputy, which will then be notified to Rail North.

14th MARCH 2016

RAIL NORTH

has an adopted Long Term Rail Strategy which sets out how rail needs to develop over the next 20 years to better support economic development.

3.2. Based on its Long Term Rail Strategy, Rail North has worked with the Department for Transport (DfT) to significantly influence the specifications for the new Northern and Transpennine Express rail franchises due to start on 1 April 2016. As a result, both franchises will provide major improvements to rail services including new trains and better services.

3.3. The new franchises were procured by the DfT and will be managed jointly by a new Rail North/DfT team based in Leeds, through a partnership agreement between the two parties. The Partnership Agreement provides for the full devolution of the franchises to Rail North in due course subject to satisfactory progress.

3.4. The DfT announced the outcome of the franchise competitions on 9 December 2015. Arriva Rail North will operate the new Northern Franchise which will run to 2025. First Group will operate the Transpennine Express franchise which will run to 2023. The DfT has signed contracts with both operators and they are now finalising their delivery plans.

3.5. The headline improvements that the new franchises will deliver are:

• £1.2 billion investment to boost to rail services

• 500 brand-new carriages, with “as new” refurbishment of remaining trains and withdrawal of all “pacer” trains by the end of 2019

• A 40% increase in capacity for 40,000 more passengers

• Major service enhancements in 2017 and 2019 – with more than 2,000 extra services a week, major improvements to Sunday services.

3.6. The key points for the Sheffield City Region in the new franchises are:

• “Northern Connect” routes providing enhanced quality of service with new trains on longer distance routes. In the SCR the Connect Routes are Hull-Doncaster-Sheffield with some trains extended to Chesterfield, Bradford-Leeds-Wakefield Westgate-Sheffield-Chesterfield-Nottingham, Leeds-Wakefield Kirkgate-Barnsley-Sheffield-Lincoln.

• These services will mean that an additional fast service each hour is provided between Sheffield, Wakefield Westgate and Leeds, complementing the existing Cross Country service, with a new fast service each hour to Lincoln. Barnsley will retain its current two fast trains per hour to Leeds and Sheffield, though the current Nottingham service will instead serve Worksop, Retford and Lincoln. Some Northern Connect trains will also serve Chapeltown.

• On local routes, an hourly service between Sheffield and Manchester Piccadilly will operate daily compared to the current two-hourly service, though not all trains will serve all stations. More seats will be provided to address peak hour crowding. Sunday services will be hourly on most routes with earlier services.

• The Transpennine Express service aims to deliver a 7 day timetable, meaning that service patterns on Saturdays and Sundays will be the same as on weekdays. The Cleethorpes-Doncaster-Sheffield-Manchester-Airport service pattern will be retained. All services on this route will be operated by Class 185 trains, which will be completely refurbished and will operate in 6 car formations between Doncaster and Manchester Airport.

• Both franchises will offer enhanced customer services, with delay replay from April

2016, free Wi-Fi on all trains, better catering on Transpennine Express and significant funding for station improvements. There will be enhanced facilities at “Northern Connect” stations and additional staffing at other stations. Both franchises will invest in new ticketing products, including supporting the Smart in the North programme being delivered through Transport for the North.

3.7. In general, the new franchises meet or exceed the SCR’s requirements as set out in the consultation response submitted in August 2014. Improvements to the Sheffield-Lincoln and Hope Valley routes, together with enhanced Sunday services are particularly welcome, as is additional capacity on both franchises. From what has been announced to date, it appears that it has not been possible to secure enhanced services for Rotherham, because of track capacity constraints and also the tram-train services due to start in early 2017. Early discussions with the new operators and Rail North will be beneficial to identify opportunities, e.g. the proposed Parkgate Station.

3.8. The Combined Authority agreed to enter into the Rail North Members Agreement in December 2015. The Members Agreement defines the governance and funding arrangements for Rail North Ltd. Rail North Ltd is proposed to be funded by a £500,000 contribution from the Rail Administrative Grant allocations to the five Passenger Transport Executive areas, split according to their size. There is also a £36,000 annual total subscription from Rail North Members, and a £226,000 contribution from the Department for Transport. At the time of the December paper, the DfT had not confirmed the continuation of Rail Administration Grant beyond 31 March 2016.

3.9. DfT has now confirmed that Rail Administration Grant will be paid to SYPTE for 2016/17 at the expected level. In addition, the way in which the £500,000 will be split between the PTE areas has now been agreed to the SCR’s satisfaction. DfT has not confirmed whether grant will be available after the 2016/17 financial year or what activities can be funded from it.

3.10. The governance structures for Rail North comprise an Association of Partner Authorities, of which all 29 authorities are members; and a Board of 11 Directors, made up of the largest authorities or groups of authorities. The SCRCA is a member of both the Association and has a seat on the Board. Cllr Sir Richard Leese, Leader of Manchester City Council, is the chair of the Association with Baroness Cllr Liz Redfern, Leader of North Lincolnshire Council as Deputy. Cllr Liam Robinson, Chair of the Merseytravel Committee, is the Chair of the Rail North Ltd Board. Cllr Julie Dore is the SCR representative on the Association and a Director of Rail North.

3.11. Rail North has asked that each Director has a nominated Deputy from the same authority or group of authorities. This means that the SCR will need to nominate a Deputy for Cllr Dore. Previously, it was agreed that the Deputy would be the Chair of the SCR Transport Committee, however that decision predates the establishment of the SCR Executive Boards, so it is appropriate to revisit. The Combined Authority is therefore asked to agree on a Deputy Director, and that Rail North is advised of this decision.

3.12. Several appointments have been made to the Rail North team. David Hoggarth, previously Director of Development at West Yorkshire Combined Authority, has been appointed as the Rail North Director, responsible for supporting the Association and Board and dealing with Members. Fergus Robertson, who was working in the private sector, has been appointed Rail Director, North of England. His responsibility is to manage the franchises, guided by the Partnership Strategic Board. Other roles are in the process of being appointed to.

3.13. The governance and staffing structures being put in place will ensure that Rail North is ready to play its full part in managing the Northern and Transpennine Express franchises from 1 April. Rail North will also develop activity to be the voice of rail in the North, for example by influencing future rail investment, responding to rail industry

consultations and seeking to influence other franchise specifications. This will include the forthcoming East Midlands Trains Franchise which is of particular interest to the SCR and expires in March 2018.

3.14. Rail North predates the establishment of Transport for the North, though the work done by Rail North with DfT and the extent of pan-regional partnership has helped its establishment. In the longer term, it is likely that rail strategy work will fall under Transport for the North, with Rail North concentrating on shorter term investments and on franchises, with the organisations likely to merge in the future.

4. Implications

i. Financial

There are no financial implications arising from this Report.

ii. Legal There are no legal implications arising from this Report.

iii. Diversity There are no diversity implications arising from this Report.

iv. Equality There are no equality implications arising from this Report.

REPORT AUTHOR Jonathan Brown POST Integrated Transport Manager Officer responsible: Julie Hurley, Director of Transport Sheffield City Region Executive Team Tel 0114 221 1263, Email [email protected]


Executive Board Resolution Record Resolutions Taken - Summary Integrated Infrastructure Plans

• RESOLVED that the board support the document to go to the LEP Board for sign off 31st March subject to a further special meeting of the IEB.

• RESOLVED, that the Board members’ note plans for the IIP Summit events (with comments).

SCRIF Business Cases

• Defer a decision on the recommendations for the Olympic Legacy Park, pending the receipt

of more supporting information to the next meeting • Agree to take a decision on the Worksop and Vesuvius scheme by email, pending the receipt

of more supporting information • Decline the recommendations to progress BRT North outside the meeting using written

procedures and request the matter be brought formally before the next meeting. SCRIF Programme

• RESOLVED, that the Board members note the programme update, agree the changes to the programme (as set out in section 3.3-3.9) and agree the proposal for scheme reviews to be undertaken by the Board going forward.

IEB Business Plan

RESOLVED, that the Board endorse the recommendation of the Plan in the composite SCR CA / LEP 16/17 Delivery Plan and note the updated activity and resourcing implications.

Supporting notes and contextual Information SCR IIP

- A presentation was given to focus on the next steps for the SCR commissioning approach for the next programme of integrated infrastructure investments. The key discussion was around the timescale and resource implications to deliver this ambitious plan.

Executive Board Infrastructure Executive Board


Chair Mayor Ros Jones




Officer


documents

- The summit around the plan was strongly supported, it was noted that the Summit will be a considerable undertaking and a small group was set up to support the process led by the SCR Team and chaired by Martin McKervey.

Business Cases

- Report was received requesting the Board endorse the CIAT recommendations in respect of the Olympic Legacy Park, and the Worksop and Vesuvius schemes, and requesting agreement for the receipt of recommendations for BRT North outside standing orders.

- Members questioned a number of matters in relation to these schemes and requested more background and financial to information to help inform these decisions.

Programme

- A report was received requesting the Board note the SCRIF programme update to agree the change control recommendations to inform the further development of the Programme.

- It was reported that the SCRIF programme is maturing well with 4 Schemes having achieved

Award of Contract so far and 5 schemes expected to achieve Award of Contract this quarter. A process review has also been undertaken to identify opportunities to speed up the business case process. It was reported that the main conclusion from this review was a recommendation to undertake contract negotiations as early as possible to ensure once approval is given the contract can be signed. This recommendation has been implemented.

- The report included a summary table of all the current status of all SCRIF projects and the

forecast delivery milestones.

SCR IEB Business Plan 2016/17 A paper was presented to provide the final draft of the Infrastructure Executive Board Business Plan 16/17 for discussion and recommending its inclusion in the composite SCR CA/ LEP 16/17 Delivery Plan. Members discussed the need to now see the various thematic Business Plans collectively to get a better understand of any overlaps to be addressed and synergies to be exploited. It was noted that an all-Leaders workshop is planned for mid-March to commence this work.

Is additional due diligence recommended by the Board? Use this section to indicate if, in the Board’s opinion, further due diligence by Senior Officers, or additional advice is needed. This will help highlight concerns and facilitate smoother final sign off

Documents

NOTICE OF MEETING › wp-content › uploads › 2019 › … · 12.1 2016/17 CA/LEP Revenue Budget 53 - 70 12.2 2016/17 CA & Partner Capital Programmes 71 - 130 13 Sheffield City