This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'FAO: David Pick re: A611 Ashfield / Mansfield Corridor Junction Improvements Scheme'.


 
National Productivity Investment Fund 
for the Local Road Network 
Application Form 
 
The level of information provided should be proportionate to the size and complexity of the 
project proposed. As a guide, for a small project we would suggest around 10 -15 pages 
including annexes would be appropriate. 
 
One application form should be completed per project and will constitute a bid.  
Applicant Information 
 
Local authority name(s)*: Nottinghamshire County Council 
*If the bid is for a joint project, please enter the names of all participating local authorities and 
specify the lead authority.
 
 
Bid Manager Name and position: David Pick- Principal Officer, Transport Planning, 
Nottinghamshire County Council.
 
 
Name and position of officer with day to day responsibility for delivering the proposed project.  
 
Contact telephone number:  0115 977 4273    Email address:xxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx 
 
 
Postal address: 

Place Department 
                                 Nottinghamshire County Council 
              

 
County Hall 
                                 Loughborough Road  
                                 West Bridgford  
 

 
 
Nottingham NG2 7QP 
 
Combined Authorities 
If the bid is from an authority within a Combined Authority, please specify the contact, ensure 
that the Combined Authority has provided a note ranking multiple applications, and append a 
copy to this bid. 
 
Name and position of Combined Authority Bid Co-ordinator: N/A 
 
Contact telephone number:  N/A     Email address:  N/A      Postal address: N/A 
 
 
When authorities submit a bid for funding to the Department, as part of the Government’s 
commitment to greater openness in the public sector under the Freedom of Information Act 
2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, they must also publish a version 
excluding any commercially sensitive information on their own website within two working days 
of submitting the final bid to the Department. The Department reserves the right to deem the 
business case as non-compliant if this is not adhered to. 
 
Please specify the weblink where this bid will be published: 
http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/a611improvements  
 


 

SECTION A - Project description and funding profile 
 
A1. Project name:
 A611 Ashfield / Mansfield Corridor Junction Improvements Scheme 
 
 
A2 : Please enter a brief description of the proposed project (no more than 50 words) 
 
The  A611  corridor provides a key link between Ashfield and Mansfield town centres, 
several business parks and the M1 motorway (J27). The project involves the improvement 
to two junctions, to remove the considerable traffic delays that hinder economic activity 
and act as a catalyst to unlock proposed employment and housing growth.   
 
A3 : Please provide a short description of area covered by the bid (no more than 50 words) 
 
The improvement corridor extends from M1 J27 via the A608 and then the A611, across 
the A617 Mansfield Ashfield Regeneration Route to the A611/ A60 junction in Mansfield – 
location map attached.  The proposal will have positive impacts on residents, workers and 
local businesses in the whole of Ashfield and Mansfield districts and beyond. 
 
OS Grid Reference: SK 52785 56865 
Postcode: NG18 5BW 
 
Please append a map showing the location (and route) of the project, existing transport 
infrastructure and other points of particular relevance to the bid, e.g. housing and other 
development sites, employment areas, air quality management areas, constraints etc. 
 
 
A4. How much funding are you bidding for? (please tick the relevant box):  
 
Small project bids (requiring DfT funding of between £2m and £5m) 
 
 
Large project bids (requiring DfT funding of between £5m and £10m) 
 
 
 
A5. Has any Equality Analysis been undertaken in line with the Equality Duty? 
 
 Yes 
 No 
 
A6. If you are planning to work with partnership bodies on this project (such as Development 
Corporations, National Parks Authorities, private sector bodies and transport operators) please 
include a short description below of how they will be involved. 
N/A 
 
A7. Combined Authority (CA) Involvement  
 
Have you appended a letter from the Combined Authority supporting this bid? 
 Yes 
 N/A 
 
 
A8. Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Involvement and support for housing delivery 
 
Have you appended a letter from the LEP supporting this bid? 
 Yes 
 No 
 
 


For proposed projects which encourage the delivery of housing, have you appended supporting 
evidence from the housebuilder/developer? 
  
 Yes 
 No 
 
 


SECTION B – The Business Case 
 
B1: Project Summary 
 
Please select what the project is trying to achieve (select all categories that apply) 
 
Essential 

 Ease urban congestion 
 Unlock economic growth and job creation opportunities 
 Enable the delivery of housing development 
 
Desirable 
 Improve Air Quality and /or Reduce CO2 emissions 
 Incentivising skills and apprentices 
 
 Other(s), Please specify – N/A 
 
 
B2 : Please provide evidence on the following questions (max 100 words for each question): 
 
a)  What is the problem that is being addressed? 
 
The A608/A611 suffers from considerable journey time delay at both peak and inter-
peak periods, see Aecom study report attached.  The corridor provides a key link from 
Ashfield/Mansfield town centres to the M1-motorway for businesses and residents of both 
these districts; and in addition has several business parks located on (Sherwood) or close 
to the route (Oakham and Ransom Wood). It is also the key route for businesses along the 
Mansfield  southern  growth  corridor (MARR) to the M1 south. The delay therefore has 
significant detrimental impacts on existing and potential employment and housing 
development sites adjacent to the corridor (eg Lindhurst, Top Wighay and Rolls Royce), 
see plan attached.
 
 
b)  What options have been considered and why have alternatives been rejected? 
 
The existing junctions to be improved are part of a proposed corridor wide treatment. 

The two junctions that form part of this bid already operate under traffic signal control. 
Alternative junction forms (roundabouts, signalised gyratories  and grade separated 
junctions) would provide greater traffic carrying capacity but would require third party land 
and be prohibitively expensive. These options have been dismissed in favour of at grade 
signal junction enlargements which can be accommodated within the confines of the 
existing public highway  and still provide a meaningful upgrade to traffic capacity and 
congestion relief.
 
 
c)  What are the expected benefits/outcomes? For example, could include easing urban 
congestion, job creation, enabling a number of new dwellings, facilitating increased GVA. 
 
The economic benefits and outcomes of this project are: 
 
1.  Removal of barriers currently causing inability to develop, delay to development, or 

reduced viability of potential employment / housing sites adjacent to and nearby the A608 
/ A611 corridor. 

2.  Improved business competitiveness and improved productivity due to reductions in 
journey time delays (resultant reduced costs for businesses/hauliers). 
 


3.  Enhance potential to attract  inward investment (including in the wider 
Ashfield/Mansfield area). 
4. Improved access to employment sites which will aid recruitment for local businesses 
and expand job horizons for jobseekers. 
 
 
d)  Are there are any related activities that the success of this project relies upon? For example, 
land acquisition, other transport interventions requiring separate funding or consents? 
 
The proposed improvements to the two junctions will be contained within the existing 

public highway and no third party land acquisition is required. Other transport 
interventions are being considered so that the corridor as a whole is treated. The two 
junction improvements which would be funded by NPIF would constitute a first phase of a 
series of improvements. If the remaining treatments in the corridor are delayed or are not 
subsequently forthcoming then the initial two junction improvements would still deliver 
significant congestion relief benefits.  
 
 
e)  What will happen if funding for this project is not secured - would an alternative (lower cost) 
solution be implemented (if yes, please describe this alternative and how it differs from the 
proposed project)? 
 
The county and district councils will continue to explore other funding opportunities 

to deliver the A611 junction improvement schemes. There are not considered to be any 
suitable lower cost solutions at the two junctions proposed for immediate improvement. 
The schemes of improvement proposed are the minimum scale of intervention that is 
feasible given the land and property constraints at each location.
 
 
f)  What is the impact of the project – and any associated mitigation works – on any statutory 
environmental constraints? For example, Local Air Quality Management Zones. 
 
Although there are not any statutory environmental constraints the proposed junction 

improvements will have the following positive impacts on the environment;  
1. 

Reduced carbon (including CO2) emissions due to reduced journey time delay   
2. 
Reduced NOx and particulate emissions from road traffic due to reduced journey time     
delay 

3. 
Reduced noise levels due to freer movement of traffic (i.e. less 
acceleration/deceleration) 

 
 
 
 


B3 : Please complete the following table. Figures should be entered in £000s 
(i.e. £10,000 = 10). 
 
Table A: Funding profile (Nominal terms) 
£000s 
        2018-19 
       2019-20 
DfT funding sought 
1,050 
950 
 
 
Local Authority contribution 
350 
268 
Third Party contribution 


TOTAL 
1,400 
1,218 
 
Notes: 
1) Department for Transport funding must not go beyond 2019-20 financial year. 
2) Bidders are asked to consider making a local contribution to the total cost. It is indicated that 
this might be around 30%, although this is not mandatory. 
 
B4 : Local Contribution & Third Party Funding : Please provide information on the following 
questions (max 100 words on items a and b): 
 
a)  Provide an outline of all non-DfT funding contributions to the project costs, the level of 
commitment, and when the contributions will become available.  
 
The County Council will allocate £618,000 (25%) towards the overall project costs split 
57% in financial year 2018-19 and 43% in 2019-20. The County Council’s Section 151 Officer 
has made a declaration to this effect, see section D2. 

 
b)  List any other funding applications you have made for this project or variants thereof and the 
outcome of these applications, including any reasons for rejection. 
 
There have been no other funding applications made for the construction of junction 

improvements along the A611 Ashfield / Mansfield corridor.  
 
B5 Economic Case 
This section should set out the range of impacts – both beneficial and adverse – of the project. 
The scope of information requested (and in the supporting annexes) will vary, including 
according to whether the application is for a small or large project.  
 
A) Requirements for small project bids (i.e. DfT contribution of less than £5m) 
 
a)  Please provide a description of your assessment of the impact of the project to include: 
 
-  Significant positive and negative impacts (quantified where possible) including in relation to 
air quality and CO₂ emissions. 
-  A description of the key risks and uncertainties; 
-  If any modelling has been used to forecast the impact of the project please set out the 
methods used to determine that it is fit for purpose 
 
The most significant positive impact of the scheme is the improvement of the operational 
efficiency of both the Shoulder of Mutton / A611 and A611/ Coxmoor Road junctions. The 
A611 is a key strategic route between Mansfield and the M1 J27 and carries over 23,000 

 


vehicles AADT through these junctions. A detailed (LINSIG junction traffic model) analysis 
of these junctions confirms that they currently  operate significantly over capacity and 
observations show considerable queuing and delay, particularly in the Am and Pm peak 
travel periods. The cost to society of the current  delays are calculated (at 2017 prices) 
£773,574 Shoulder of Mutton and £2,195,075 at Coxmoor Road. With proposed growth 
forecast in each of the Ashfield, Mansfield and Gedling Local Plans these delays are 
forecast to increase exponentially. 
 
The proposed schemes of improvement will reduce traffic queues, reduce driver delays 
and improve both journey times and journey time reliability. This is especially important 
for existing business users of the Sherwood , Oakham and Ransom Wood Business Parks 
which lie adjacent to the A611 and will enhance the potential for inward investment and 
employment growth at Lindhurst, Rolls Royce, Top Wighay Farm and Prologis Park which 
will all rely on and benefit from improved accessibility in the A611corridor, see location 
plan. A LINSIG assessment of the performance of the improved junctions has shown that 
for a single future year there is forecast to be a saving of 255 pcu hours delay in the Am 
peak and 293 pcu hours in the Pm peak when compared to Do Minimum in the same 
assessment year. The forecast journey time improvements will enhance existing business 
productivity and competitiveness. The value of these future year transport user benefits 
have been calculated as over £6.4m per annum i.e. a large beneficial impact. A benefit cost 
ratio has not been computed for this project however on the strength of the results of a 
single future assessment year it is reasonable to expect that the BCR would be very high. 
 
The improvement of key traffic intersections on the A611  is predicted to lessen the 
incidence of traffic queues and reduce stop-start  driving conditions. This in turn is 
predicted to reduce road traffic noise (less braking and acceleration of vehicles) and 
reduce the amount of harmful vehicle emissions (less vehicle idling and stop-start driving 
/  slow traffic speeds). The only  negative  impact however is a forecast increase in CO2 
emissions which tend to rise in line with forecast increased traffic speeds. An Appraisal 
Summary Table is appended to this bid setting out a summary of the key environmental 
impacts of the proposed junction improvements. 
 
The proposed junction improvement schemes fit within the foot print of the existing public 
highway and given the limited scale and nature of the proposals the risk and uncertainties 
are therefore considered minimal. A Risk Register is attached which identifies the largest 
risk as a financial one i.e.  that any subsequent increase in the current scheme cost 
estimate could endanger the viability of the project. The final cost of utilities works is the 
largest uncertainty in this regard.  It should be noted however that NCC  accepts 
responsibility for meeting any costs over and above the DfT contribution including 
potential cost over runs. 
 
* Small projects bids are not required to produce a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) but may want to 
include this here if available. 
 
b)  Small project bidders should provide the following in annexes as supporting material: 
 
Has a Project Impacts Pro Forma been appended?   
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
 
Has a description of data sources / forecasts been appended? 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
A project baseline study is attached (Aecom June 2017) 
 
Has an Appraisal Summary Table been appended? 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
 
 


Other material supporting your assessment of the project described in this section should be 
appended to the bid.  
 
 Please see attached an A611 baseline conditions report June 2017 which quantifies the 
existing traffic delay, personal injury accidents and costs to the economy of congestion 
in the A611 Ashfield / Mansfield corridor. 
 
* This list is not necessarily exhaustive and it is the responsibility of bidders to provide sufficient 
information to demonstrate the analysis supporting the economic case is fit-for-purpose. 
 
B) Additional requirements for large project bids (i.e. DfT contribution of more than £5m) 
 
c)  Please provide a short description (max 500 words) of your assessment of the value for 
money of the project including your estimate of the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) to include: 
 
-  Significant monetised and non-monetised costs and benefits  
-  Description of the key risks and uncertainties and the impact these have on the BCR; 
-  Key assumptions including: appraisal period, forecast years, optimism bias applied; and 
-  Description of the modelling approach used to forecast the impact of the project and the 
checks that have been undertaken to determine that it is fit-for-purpose.  
Not applicable 
 
d)  Additionally detailed evidence supporting your assessment, including the completed 
Appraisal Summary Table, should be attached as annexes to this bid. A checklist of 
material to be submitted in support of large project bids has been provided.
 
 
Has an Appraisal Summary Table been appended? 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
 
-  Please append any additional supporting information (as set out in the Checklist). 
*It is the responsibility of bidders to provide sufficient information for DfT to undertake a full 
review of the analysis. 

 


B6 Economic Case: For all bids the following questions relating to desirable criteria should be 
answered
 
Please describe the air quality situation in the area where the project will be implemented by 
answering the three questions below. 
 
i) Has Defra’s national air quality assessment, as reported to the EU Commission, identified 
and/or projected an exceedance in the area where the project will be implemented? 
 
 Yes 
 No 
 
ii) Is there one or more Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) in the area where the project 
will be implemented? AQMAs must have been declared on or before the 31 March 2017 
 
 Yes 
 No 
 
iii) What is the project’s impact on local air quality? 
 
 Positive 
 Neutral 
 
 Negative 
 
-  Please supply further details: 
 
The additional traffic capacity provided at the improved A611 junctions is predicted to 
lessen the incidence of traffic queues and stop-start traffic conditions, particularly at peak 
times, and hence reduce harmful emissions. The size of the benefits have not been 
quantified but would represent a ‘slight beneficial’ impact on a typical 5 point qualitative 
scale. 
 
iv) Does the project promoter incentivise skills development through its supply chain? 
 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
 
-  Please supply further details: 
 
The Council’s proposed contractor Via East Midlands complies with the D2N2 LEP’s 
Local Procurement Charter. The Charter demonstrates a commitment from business and 
public sector bodies working within D2N2 to align their infrastructure and development 
projects to match employer need and demand with the aim of creating a sustainable market 
for skills and development and supply chain integration within the area. The project 
promoter and its appointed contractor will look to create jobs, training opportunities and 
apprenticeships locally as part of the A611 junction improvement proposals.  
 
B7. Management Case - Delivery (Essential) 
 
Deliverability is one of the essential criteria for this Fund and as such any bid should set out, 
with a limit of 100 words for each of a) to b), any necessary statutory procedures that are 
needed before it can be constructed.  
 
a)  A project plan (typically summarised in Gantt chart form) with milestones should be included, 
covering the period from submission of the bid to project completion. 
 
The attached project plans  identify  the main project milestones that would need to be 
addressed to deliver the projects. No statutory procedures are required to deliver this 

 


project and both junction improvements could be constructed and open to traffic by July 
2019 assuming a funding decision in November 2017.    

 
Has a project plan been appended to your bid? 
 
 Yes 
 No 
 
b)  If delivery of the project is dependent on land acquisition, please include a letter from the 
respective land owner(s) to demonstrate that arrangements are in place to secure the land 
to enable the authority to meet its construction milestones. 
 
No land acquisition is required as both junction improvements can be contained within 
the confines of the existing public highway. 
 
Has a letter relating to land acquisition been appended? 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
 
c)  Please provide in Table C summary details of your construction milestones (at least one but 
no more than 6) between start and completion of works: 
 
 
 
 
Table C: Construction milestones 
 
 
Estimated Date 
Funding approval 
     November 2017 
Junction 1 (Shoulder of Mutton Hill) detailed 
September 2018 
design completed 
Junction 1 Start of works 
October 2018 
Junction 1 Traffic signal alterations 
January 2019 
Junction 1 Completed 
 February 2019 
Junction 2 ( A611/ Coxmoor Road) detailed 
January 2019 
design completed 
April 2019 
Junction 2 Start of works 
June 2019 
Junction 2 Traffic signal alterations 
July 2019 
Junction 2 completed 
As above 
Completion of works (if different) 
 
 
 
 
 
d)  Please list any major transport projects costing over £5m in the last 5 years which the 
authority has delivered, including details of whether these were completed to time and 
budget (and if not, whether there were any mitigating circumstances) 
 
The local authority has project managed and delivered a number of transport projects 
over the last five years, the most recent is the Hucknall Town Centre Improvement Scheme 
(DfT contribution £8.49m).
 The Full Approval submission to the DfT had an estimated total 
scheme cost of £12.9m. The scheme is now completed and the outturn cost is £13.4m. The 
increase in cost is explained by additional flood alleviation works that had to be 
incorporated into the scheme post planning approval.  The scheme was delivered 3 weeks 
behind schedule due to unforeseen ground conditions.  
   
 
10 

 
B8. Management Case – Statutory Powers and Consents (Essential)
 
 
a)  Please list if applicable, each power / consent etc. already obtained, details of date acquired, 
challenge period (if applicable), date of expiry of powers and conditions attached to them. 
Any key dates should be referenced in your project plan. 
 
Following a scoping opinion Ashfield  District Council, the local planning authority, 

have advised that the highway improvement proposals constitute ‘permitted development’ 
as governed by The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 
1995, Part 13, Development by local highway authorities, Class A – Permitted development: 
“The carrying out by a local highway authority on land outside but adjoining the boundary 
of an existing highway of works required for or incidental to the maintenance or 
improvement of the highway”. Therefore neither planning permission nor an 
Environmental Assessment is required. 
 
b)  Please list if applicable any outstanding statutory powers / consents etc. including the 
timetable for obtaining them. 
 
There are no outstanding statutory powers to be obtained. The scheme can be 
delivered without delay. 
 
B9. Management Case – Governance (Essential)
 
 
Please name those who will be responsible for delivering the project, their roles (Project 
Manager, SRO etc.) and responsibilities, and how key decisions are/will be made. An 
organogram may be useful here.  
 
Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC) will be responsible for the project’s delivery. The 
scheme will be constructed by the County Council’s new Teckal Company,  Via East 
Midlands Ltd, acting on behalf of the County Council with contract management support 
provided by Council.  NCC has significant  experience  in  delivering publically funded 
projects and has a centralised procurement function overseeing compliance with public 
procurement requirements. A Project Board will be established to oversee the delivery of 
the project. The Project Board will include all relevant partners. Board members will review 
and advise on the delivery of the project through established regular reporting 
mechanisms. The Senior  Responsible  Officer will be Gary Wood (NCC  Group  Manager 
Environment and Highways) who has the authority to ensure delivery of this  project. A 
delivery team organogram is attached which provides further details of the intended 
governance structure and key decision making layers.    
 
 
 
 
11 

B10. Management Case - Risk Management (Essential) 
 
All projects will be expected to undertake a Quantified Risk Assessment (QRA) and a risk 
register should be included. Both should be proportionate to the nature and complexity of the 
project. A Risk Management Strategy should be developed that outlines how risks will be 
managed. 
 
Please ensure that in the risk / QRA cost that you have not included any risks associated with 
ongoing operational costs and have used the P50 value. 
 
Has a QRA been appended to your bid?  
 
 
 
 Yes 
 No 
See Risk Register for probability of risks happening 
Has a Risk Management Strategy been appended to your bid? 
 Yes 
 No 
See Risk Register for mitigation actions re risk.  
Please provide evidence on the following points (where applicable) with a limit of 50 words for 
each: 
 
a)  What risk allowance has been applied to the project cost? 
 
The total cost of the proposed junction improvements is £2.618m and this is based on 
estimates by the County Council  and Via East Midlands Ltd  using direct experience of 
outturn costs of recent similar projects. This  price includes an allowance of 10% 
contingency on the construction element of the project.  No optimism bias has been 
included in the project cost.  

 
How will cost overruns be dealt with? 
 
The County Council is confident of delivering this project within the identified budget. 
During construction there may be a need to revise the scheme  and this may require 
additional works and additional cost. The Council’s project management team will closely 
monitor and supervise the works to mitigate against any significant cost increases. The 
County Council accepts responsibility for meeting any cost over runs. 

  
b)  What are the main risks to project timescales and what impact this will have on cost? 
 
The protection and diversion of utilities equipment remains the most significant risk in 
terms of both timescale and financial risk. The County Council will work closely with the 
utilities companies to ensure that construction of the junction improvement schemes can 
be brought within both the Council’s work package and within the agreed financial budget.   

 
 
B11. Management Case - Stakeholder Management (Essential)
 
 
The bid should demonstrate that the key stakeholders and their interests have been identified 
and considered as appropriate. These could include other local authorities, the Highways 
England, statutory consultees, landowners, transport operators, local residents, utilities 
companies etc. This is particularly important in respect of any bids related to structures that may 
require support of Network Rail and, possibly, train operating company(ies). 
 
a)  Please provide a summary in no more than 100 words of your strategy for managing 
stakeholders, with details of the key stakeholders together with a brief analysis of their 
influences and interests.  
 
12 

The key stakeholders in this project are Ashfield and Mansfield District Council’s and 
the joint Regeneration Board representing these local authorities, Mansfield 2020 business 
club Members and the public transport operators who are set to benefit from the removal 
of congestion and improvements in journey time reliability of the bus services that would 
follow.  As the proposed improvement works are within the footprint of the existing 
junctions there is no impact on statutory consultees. The County Council is proposing to 
notify the public of the proposed junction improvement schemes via an interactive project 
website, the distribution of letters to local residents and businesses and posting of signs 
on site.  
 
b)  Can the project be considered as controversial in any way? 
 Yes 
 No 
If yes, please provide a brief summary in no more than 100 words 
 
N/A 
 

c)  Have there been any external campaigns either supporting or opposing the project? 
 
 Yes 
 
 No 
 
If yes, please provide a brief summary (in no more than 100 words) 
 
N/A 

 
d)  For large projects only please also provide a Stakeholder Analysis and append this to your 
application. 
 
Has a Stakeholder Analysis been appended?    
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A  
 
e)  For large projects only please provide a Communications Plan with details of the level of 
engagement required (depending on their interests and influence), and a description of how 
and by what means they will be engaged with. 
 
Has a Communications Plan been appended?   
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A  
 
 
B12. Management Case – Local MP support (Desirable)
 
 
e)  Does this proposal have the support of the local MP(s); 
 
Name of MP(s) and Constituency 
 
1. Gloria De Piero – Ashfield   
 Yes 
 No 
 
 
 
B13. Management Case - Assurance
 (Essential) 
 
We will require Section 151 Officer confirmation (Section D) that adequate assurance systems 
are in place.  
 
See Section D2 for signature of Nigel Stevenson NCC Section 151 Officer confirming the 
assurance arrangements. 
 
 
13 

Additionally, for large projects please provide evidence of an integrated assurance and approval 
plan. This should include details of planned health checks or gateway reviews. 
 
N/A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SECTION C – Monitoring, Evaluation and Benefits Realisation 
 
 
C2.  
Please set out, in no more than 100 words, how you plan to measure and report on the 
benefits of this project, alongside any other outcomes and impacts of the project. 
 
The project will deliver immediate transport user benefits to commuters, business 
travellers and drivers on other journey purposes.  These journey time and reliability 
benefits will encourage inward investment and the build out of housing and employment 
sites alongside the A611corridor.  The County Council will monitor and report the traffic 
and travel conditions arising from the implementation of the  junction improvement 
schemes with a view to ensuring that the traffic signal arrangements operate as efficiently 
as possible and hence maximise the social and economic benefits. 
 
A fuller evaluation for large projects may also be required depending on their size and type.  
 
14 



SECTION D: Declarations 
 

D1. Senior Responsible Owner Declaration 
As Senior Responsible Owner for the A611Ashfield / Mansfield corridor junction improvements 
scheme I hereby submit this request for approval to DfT on behalf of Nottinghamshire County 
Council and confirm that I have the necessary authority to do so. 
 
I confirm that Nottinghamshire County Council will have all the necessary statutory powers in 
place to ensure the planned timescales in the application can be realised. 
Name: Gary Wood 
Signed: 
 
Position: Group Manager Environment  and Highways   
 
 
 
D2. Section 151 Officer Declaration 
As Section 151 Officer for Nottinghamshire County Council I declare that the project cost 
estimates quoted in this bid are accurate to the best of my knowledge and that 
Nottinghamshire County Council  
 
-  has allocated sufficient budget to deliver this project on the basis of its proposed 
funding contribution 
-  accepts responsibility for meeting any costs over and above the DfT contribution 
requested, including potential cost overruns and the underwriting of any funding 
contributions expected from third parties 
-  accepts responsibility for meeting any ongoing revenue requirements in relation to the 
project 
-  accepts that there will be no further increase in DfT funding considered beyond the 
maximum contribution requested and that no DfT funding will be provided for this bid in 
2020/21. 
-  confirms that the authority has the necessary governance / assurance arrangements in 
place and, for smaller project bids, the authority can provide, if required, evidence of a 
stakeholder analysis and communications plan in place 
-  confirms that if required a procurement strategy for the project is in place, is legally 
compliant and is likely to achieve the best value for money outcome 
Name: Nigel Stevenson 
Signed: 
Service Director Finance, Procurement and 
Improvement. 
 
 
HAVE YOU INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING WITH YOUR BID? 
 
Combined Authority multiple bid ranking note (if applicable) 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Map showing location of the project and its wider context 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Combined Authority support letter (if applicable) 
 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
LEP support letter (if applicable)   
 
 
 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Housebuilder / developer evidence letter (if applicable) 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Land acquisition letter (if applicable) 
 
 
 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Projects impact pro forma (must be a separate MS Excel) 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Appraisal summary table   
 
 
 
 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
Project plan/Gantt chart 
 
 
 
 
 
 Yes 
 No  
 N/A 
 
15