CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS PROGRAMME Construction Logistics Improvement - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS PROGRAMME

Construction Logistics Improvement Group Meeting 2

Ref Item Timing Lead 1 Introductions 10 GD 2 CLIG Terms of Reference 10 GD 3 Workstream 1 Working Group Feedback Terms of Reference 15 MS 4 Workstream 2 Working Group Feedback Terms of Reference 15 MS 5 Workstream 3 Working Group Feedback Terms of Reference SDG - Barriers to River and Rail Uptake 35 GD 6 Break 20 All 7 Articulated vs rigid vehicles 10 MS 8 Workstream 4 Working Group Feedback Terms of Reference AECOM - Delivery Inefficiency Research 35 GD 9 Old Oak Common and Park Royal Opportunity Area (ODPC) 20 CW 10 Summary and next steps 10 GD

Introductions

▪ Organisation and role Question: From your perspective, is out of hours working possible within construction logistics?

Construction Logistics Improvement Group Terms of Reference

• A cost benefit analysis study is needed to support the whole programme and create

the business case for change

• A list of opportunity areas (OA) and their phasing should be compiled and an

upcoming OA should be identified as a future exemplar development

• That a full stakeholder map be developed to cover all relevant players that influence

the construction supply chain

• A review is required to understand the developments thresholds for referred planning

applications

• That the objectives of the Programme are fed into the upcoming Mayor’s Transport

Strategy and the London Plan

• A full literature review of existing studies and research is conducted to ensure the

programme resources can be targeted effectively

• Explore a method of communicating the programme and providing a repository for its

information

Broader programme issues identified at the sub groups

E Workstream 1

Programme baseline and evaluation

Purpose: ▪ To create a London Construction Logistics Model that quantifies the amount, type and impact of construction logistics freight ▪ Evaluate the success of the Construction Logistics Programme ▪ Policy scenarios modelling Scope: ▪ Define data metrics and collection methods ▪ Create a model that calculates volumes, impacts and value ▪ Ensure the model can be used for ‘what if’ analysis and policy ‘optioneering’

WORKSTREAM 1 – Terms of Reference

Construction logistics baseline model and programme evaluation

Next Steps: 1. Re-worded Terms of Reference will be circulated. 2. Gathering of ‘modelling enthusiasts’ group to understand the art of the possible 3. Build spec to commission building the model 4. Ensure political bases are covered 5. Email TfL with any further ideas or thoughts 6. Composition of the working group to be reviewed

WORKSTREAM 1

Construction logistics baseline model and programme evaluation

WORKSTREAM 1 – Terms of Reference

Construction logistics baseline model and programme evaluation

Workstream 2

Embedding Construction Logistics Plans

Purpose: ▪ To normalise the planning, conditioning and practical application

• f CLPs in London & beyond

Scope: ▪ Update the existing CLP Guidance ▪ Embed in forthcoming mayoral transport policy statements ▪ Agree roll-out across all 33 London boroughs ▪ Conduct training & development gap analysis ▪ Develop a foundation level professional training course ▪ Secure 200 qualified planners and developers

WORKSTREAM 2 – Terms of Reference

Embedding Construction Logistics Plans (CLPs)

WORKSTREAM 2

Embedding Construction Logistics Plans Next Steps: ▪ ARUP to share work for review with stakeholders and invite comment/approval ▪ Volunteer organisations needed for ‘show and tell’ for the toolkit ▪ Robin Close to forward exemplar CLPs and investigate an introduction to Multiplex as an exemplar developer ▪ All - Share examples of good CLPs with the project

Workstream 3

Embedding Construction Logistics Plans

WORKSTREAM 3

Reducing Construction Road Freight Volumes Purpose To minimise the volume of construction freight through a mix of mode shift and load consolidation Scope

• Oversee and review technical research to investigate

the barriers to water and rail freight uptake

• Produce and publish a Water Freight Toolkit
• Explore and scope a Rail Freight Toolkit
• Explore and expose existing rail and water activity
• Review alternative methods of construction
• Review vehicle types, pay loads, capacity and usage
• Review collaboration methods to support efficiency
• Develop business case and cost benefits of

consolidation

WORKSTREAM 3

Reducing Construction Road Freight Volumes Next steps

• Develop an action plan based on Workstream scope
• Action plan first step priorities to include:
• Take ownership of the Water Freight Toolkit
• Finalise barriers to water and rail research
• Identify and case study existing rail activity
• Identify and case study existing water activity
• Identify and expose large capacity vehicle usage
• Action plan second step priorities to include:
• Explore and scope a Rail Freight Toolkit
• Review collaboration and alternative construction

methods

• Explore the outline business case for

consolidation

Project Update

Barriers to River and Rail Use

Investigating the barriers to transporting construction material and waste by river and rail

Research Project

Transport of London (TfL) November 2016

|

Introduction

• Project Background
• Project Approach:
• Methodology
• Timescales
• Initial Findings
• Project Outputs
• Potential interventions
• Reporting

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 17

|

Project Background

• Comprehensive study that seeks to bring together a

thorough understanding of the barriers for all stakeholders

• f utilising river and rail for construction purposes.
• Objective is to speak to a minimum of 200 people across all

sectors of the construction industry, including:

• Developers
• Contractors
• Supply Chain
• Planners
• Boroughs
• Other Key Stakeholders (TfL / PLA etc).
• Understanding the barriers will assist in identifying

appropriate interventions to encourage greater use in years to come.

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 18

|

Project Methodology

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 19

October 2016 March 2017

|

Initial Findings

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 20

Percentage of barriers identified across all interviews:

Awareness

|

Initial Findings

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 21

Percentage of barriers identified across all interviews:

• Awareness
• Policy
• Resources
• Perception of Cost

Awareness

| November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 22

Initial Findings

Barrier: Weighted by Number of Responses:

| November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 23

Initial Findings

Barrier: Weighted by Number of Responses:

• Awareness
• Policy
• Resources
• Perception of Cost

|

Initial Findings

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 24

• 71% of all organisations identify skills and / or resources as barrier.
• 58% of all organisations identify communication/awareness as a barrier.
• 8% of all organisations identify scale / size of goods as a barrier.
• 16% of all organisations identify physical constraints as a barrier.
• 57% of private sector organisations identify cost as a barrier.
• 85% of public sector organisations identify policy as a barrier.

|

Project Outputs

• Consolidated report outlining results

from the three strands of research.

• Output likely to focus on key themes

and resulting recommendations in easy to read / digest format:

• Interventions
• Enablers

November 2016 Investigating the barriers.... 25

Interventions

• Exploring the potential for earlier

interventions in the planning process.

• Exploring in greater detail issues

associated with cost – cost transparency.

• Potential physical interventions –

more boats, consolidation areas etc. Enablers

• Relaxation of certain policies where

appropriate (i.e. time restrictions on site).

• Improving communication /

awareness.

• Increasing industry skills / resources.

DISCLAIMER: This work may only be used within the context and scope of work for which Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this work without the express and written permission of Steer Davies Gleave shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer Davies Gleave for all loss or damage resulting therefrom.

Questions

Matthew Harris Matthew.Harris@sdgworld.net

Break

Discussion

Articulated Vs Rigid

Proposed area for Investigation

▪ Is there an economic and social gain available from moving to more 44t vehicles? ▪ Circa 2 x 44t vehicles carry the same payload as 3 x 32t vehicles ▪ Less drivers, capital, fuel & emissions ▪ Less road risk 2 vs 3, better qualified drivers, N3 vs N3G ▪ Should be cheaper

Existing Work

Freight Best Practice Guide Contractor Projects – Cement Tarmac/Stobart, Aggregates TfL Ground Conditions Work

Barriers to Adoption

▪ It’s what we’ve always done ▪ It’s what sites ask for ▪ Tipping stability ▪ Tight sites ▪ Shortage of drivers – qualified drivers prefer easy trunking? ▪ Site conditions ▪ Flexibility of kit

Next steps & tactics

1. Discuss at Working Group 2. Understand barriers and perceived barriers 3. How do we breakdown the barriers? 4. Size of the prize 5. Trials/examples/case studies 6. Range of different materials/sites

Workstream 4

Reducing Construction Road Freight Impact

Purpose To minimise the impact of construction freight through a mix of mode shift and load consolidation Scope

• Oversee and provide peer review on technical

research on the local impact of construction logistics

• Develop the cost benefit and business case for

effective holding areas

• Document short, medium and long term

infrastructure plan and routes

• Scope research on journey planning issues
• Engage with CLOCS, LoCITY and Retiming to help

address safety, environmental and peak congestion issues

• Embrace and provide a measured contribution to the

Mayor’s ambition for safer lorries

WORKSTREAM 4

Reducing Construction Road Freight Impact

Next steps

• Develop an action plan based on Workstream scope
• Action plan first step priorities to include:
• Finalise impact of construction logistics research
• Scope research on journey planning
• Develop standard lines to take to input into the

upcoming consultation on HGV Direct Vision

• Develop an engagement plan for CLOCS,

LoCITY and Retiming

• Action plan second step priorities to include:
• Scope the business case for effective holding

areas

• Develop an approach for documenting short,

medium and long term infrastructure plans/routes

WORKSTREAM 4

Reducing Construction Road Freight Impact

Project Update

Delivery Inefficiency Research

Client logo

Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

November 28, 2016

Geoff Clarke

November 28, 2016

Construction Sector in Greater London Area

November 28, 2016 Page 38 Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

Central London

• Significant increase in contracts awarded in

2015 compared to previous years.

• A sharp increase in construction activity is

expected from 2017.

Greater London Area

• Construction activity is not evenly

distributed across boroughs.

• Each type of construction activity and

borough have different challenges.

Source: Barbour Abi

Residential Commercial Infrastructure

Project Requirements

November 28, 2016 Page 39 Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

• The aim is to quantify the external costs caused by construction sites when vehicles

cannot make a delivery on arrival at site due to: 1. inadequate planning, 2. delivery management systems, and 3. vehicle holding areas.

• % of failed deliveries
• % early/late deliveries
• Average waiting time to access site
• Distance vehicles travel whilst waiting for a delivery

slot

Construction Sites Performance

• The construction industry faces a number of challenges in its attempt to increase
• perational efficiency, while reducing the risks and environmental impact of deliveries.

Benefits of Achieving Higher Efficiencies on Construction Deliveries

Project Overview and Expectations (I)

Our proposed methodology is set out in this section under the following tasks:

November 28, 2016 Page 40 Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

Task 1

• Project Initiation and Project Management

Task 2

• Develop a Primary Research Plan

Task 3

• Build and Manage a Contact Management Database

Task 4

• Site Selection and Commissioning

Task5

• Data Collection

Task 6

• Presentation of Initial Insights

Task 7

• Develop an Impact Assessment Model

Task 8

• Data Analysis and Impact Modelling

Task 9

• Reporting

Task 10

• Presentation of Final Findings

Task 4

• Site Selection and Commissioning

Location Construction name Type of site Developer Project Duration Construction Phase Central One Blackfriars Tower Residential Ian Simpson Architects 2015-2017 Intermediate Saatchi Block Residential AECOM 2016-2018 Initial London Shell Redevelopment Civil/Public Qatari Diar 2015-2021 Initial Cross Rail – Bond St Update Energy TfL 2011-2017 Final Packington State Residential Savills 2012-2020 Intermediate Garden Bridge Transport BAM Nutall 2016-2018 Initial LSE Redevelopment Education Turley Associates 2015-2018 Intermediate Market Tower Redevelopment Residential Wandsworth (Borough) 2016-2019 Initial Battersea Power Station Residential Chapman BDSP 2015-2019 Intermediate Inner Whitechapel St Transport Crossrail 2012-2018 Intermediate Leamouth Peninsula North Civil/Public Billfinger 2014-2019 Intermediate Kings Mall Car Park Education? Brogan Group 2013-2018 Intermediate Battersea Exchange Education Cascade Communicati

• n

2015-2019 Intermediate Cannon Wharf Business Centre Residential CGMS 2013-2018 Intermediate Heron Quay Offices Canary Wharf Group 2015-2019 Initial Bishopsgate Offices Allies & Morrison 2015-2019 Initial Heart of East Greenwich Residential DP9 Planning 2012-2019 Intermediate Glasshouse Gardens Residential Prater Ltd 2014-2017 Intermediate Outer Saffron Square Residential Morrisroe Ltd 2010-2017 Final Abbey Wood Railway Station Transport Carillion 2014-2018 Intermediate Beddington Energy Facility Civil/Public Viridor Waste 2015-2018 Initial Stonegrove Regeneration Residential Borough of Barnet 2009-2018 Intermediate Deephams Sewage Water Thames Water 2015-2018 Initial Crossrail Woolwich tunnel Transport Crossrail & TfL 2008-2019 Intermediate

Construction Sites – List Review

• Site list: LNA (392 sites), UK Gov’t (681

sites), LDD, London Infrastructure Map, CLOCS

• Opportunities Areas: Mayor of London (45

sites, updated March 2016)

Project Overview and Expectations (II)

November 28, 2016 Page 41 Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

• 1. Sites identification and mapping exercise

Task5

• Data Collection
• 2. Sites categorisation, selection and data collection:
• From freight operators (Fleet Management

Software)

• From Vehicle Booking

and Monitoring Systems (VBMS)

• From construction sites

Good Sites Sites without HA Sites without DMS Problematic Sites Central London Inner London Outer London

Data Analysis and Visualisation

November 28, 2016 Page 42 Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

Output Examples:

Spatial data visualisation on selected freight routes

Third-Party Collaboration and Support

November 28, 2016 Page 43 Construction Deliveries Inefficiencies

VBMS & Fleet Management Software Providers Fleet Operators Construction Firms Fulcrum

Will you help us?

Client logo

Thank You

November 28, 2016

Old Oak Common and Park Royal Opportunity Area

Old Oak and Park Royal: the UK’s Largest Regeneration Project

Clare Woodcock Construction Logistics Improvement Group 25 November 2016

LOCATION LOCATION

London’s largest Opportunity Area

OPDC boundary area

The site

Introducing OPDC

PARK ROYAL OLD OAK WORMWOOD SCRUBS

Three distinct character areas

• 2026 Old Oak station opens
• 250,000 passengers per day
• 90% the size of Waterloo station
• £1bn Government investment at Old Oak
• 3 new and 2 improved stations
• 202 trains at peak across Old Oak
• 10 rail lines
• 8 mins from central London
• 10 mins from Heathrow
• 38 mins from Birmingham

A super hub station

Marble Arch Houses of Parliament Oxford Circus Hyde Park Corner Tower of London City Hall Barbican Tate City Canary Wharf O2 Olympic Park OLD OAK Kings Cross Camden Town Euston Emirates Stadium Angel

How big is Old Oak?

Park Royal today – over 1,700 businesses

Wormwood Scrubs

Enhancing the Grand Union Canal

Community

Skills

Transport for London Developers & Investors Department for Transport

Department for Communities & Local Government

Network Rail HS2 Three Boroughs Businesses & Residents Landowners

Key partners

The London Plan formally designates Old Oak and Park Royal as having capacity for 25,500

new homes

and 65,000

new jobs.

Commitment to growth

Agreement in principle

Early work on core development site

Masterplan

Old Oak today

Old Oak tomorrow

@oldoakparkroyal www.london.gov.uk/opdc info@opdc.london.gov.uk 020 7983 5732

CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS PROGRAMME

Summary and next steps

THANK YOU