Regional Workshop Workshop Purpose To reinforce RCA understanding - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Regional Workshop

Workshop Purpose

To reinforce RCA understanding of using the Business Case Approach in Activity Management Planning and the performance reporting tool.

Purpose Purpose

Overview

• Review of previous workshop
• REG Update
• REG Delivery & Learning and Development

timeline/key dates

• Regional Council Presentation on regional transport

strategy

• 30 year infrastructure plan fit into the development
• f the BCA AMP
• RCA Strategic Case Outline (ALT1-Presentations)
• Point of Entry & Self Assessment (ALT1-Presentations)
• NZTA PoE Presentation on National PoE Feedback &

Learning

• ONRC Performance Reporting Tool

Agenda

Learning

Ac vity

LA1 - Func onal classifica on LA2 - Customer Promises, Customer Levels of Service & Performance Measures (to include DIA Performance Measures) LA3 - RAMM LA4 - Long-term condi on and deteriora on modelling; use of non-asset variables (i.e. economic, social, and environmental value) LA5 - Interpreta on, analysis, and understanding how to use data LA6 - Road network planning LA7 - Business Case Approach Investment Logic Mapping LA8 - Transport system – why we are doing this, how it fits together, dynamic nature, and ‘sharing the story’ LA9 - How to effec vely use the ONRC, CLoS, and BCA LA10 - Managing and leading change LA11 - Communica ng and engaging with stakeholders LA12 - Effec ve collabora on and building buy-in LA13- Financial & strategic planning systems – improving internal engagement and understanding LA14 - Overview of exis ng knowledge base and tools LA15 - Procurement & using the CLoS/PM in contracts

Systems Data

C

• m

m u n i c a

• n

s A p p r

• v

a l P r

• c

e s s e s S e r v i c e D e l i v e r y

Check In

• Intro’s for any new members
• Any constraints on the day?
• What do you want out of today?
• Would anyone like to talk or present anything

additional to the team today?

Review

• Any comments or follow up from the previous

workshop?

REG Update

• Change in leadership group

– Rui Leitao – New Chair – Gary McGraw (Far North) – Denis Lewis (Taupo) – Chris Gregory (Christchurch)

• Worked with Sub-groups to better align work programmes

with learning and development.

• Better integration with NZTA work on investment framework.

PI Expectations for next LTP

• We will be expecting maintenance programmes

submitted to the 2018-21 NLTP to be based

– on first principles having regard to the ONRC and CLoS – reflect best practice for activity management planning and smart procurement.

• We will be expecting much more evidence and rigorous

analysis to support submissions and not a simple reflection of current allocation plus escalation.

REG Timeline (Working)

REG L&D Timeline (Working)

Regionally Specific Issues

• Purpose: to provide an opportunity to discuss

regionally important issues (risks and opportunities) with peers.

– Add a workshop agenda item for ‘Regionally Specific Issues’. – Limit to 30 mins in each workshop

Regional Council Presentations

• Purpose: to provide an understanding of the

regional transport strategy and RLTP.

– Overview of transport context & potential plan – strategic case – Key improvements and any learning from last development work – Opportunities and risks? – Plan forward

Regional Council Workshop Session

• Purpose: to explore links between TLA and RC strategic

direction.

– How does your infrastructure and AMP strategy link into the regional transport strategy / plan? – What would it take to improve alignment between the two strategies? – What is required to make the process align and support the successful development of local and regional strategies? – What opportunities & risks exist?

Regional Council Workshop Session

• Complete a regional BCA AMP self-assessment

BCA AMP Self-assessment

RCA & HNO Strategic Case Session

• Purpose: to reinforce and share learning of the Strategic Case and

understand the ‘why’.

– 30 year infrastructure strategy – RCA & HNO strategic case in the BCA AMP (ALT1)

Activity Management Plan New & Improvement Projects

Business Case Approach Activity Management Planning

Programme Business Case

Strategic Case

Point of Entry

• n what you need to do to complete the BCA AMP. Early engagement

Indicative Business Case

• pportunity to choose a preferred option to progress for further

Detailed Business Case

• utcomes identified in the strategic case, and is afforable.

• bjectives, and underlying or umbrella strategic
• documents. Helps position desired outcomes

Strategic Context

Strategic Assessment

1 2

• AMP. Helps develop useful groupings of activities to tell a more cohesive

New & Improvement Projects

3 4 5

Maintenance, Operations, Renewals & Minor Improvements

6

Delivery Learning & Improvement

Point of Entry

7

30 Year Infrastructure Strategy

• Purpose: to explore how the 30 year

infrastructure strategy fits into the development

• f the BCA AMP.

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B LG Act

1) A local authority must, as part of its long-term plan, prepare and adopt an infrastructure strategy for a period

• f at least 30 consecutive financial years.

2) The purpose of the infrastructure strategy is to— (a) identify significant infrastructure issues for the local authority over the period covered by the strategy; and (b) identify the principal options for managing those issues and the implications of those options.

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B LG Act

1) A local authority must, as part of its long-term plan, prepare and adopt an infrastructure strategy for a period

• f at least 30 consecutive financial years.

2) The purpose of the infrastructure strategy is to— (a) identify significant infrastructure issues for the local authority over the period covered by the strategy; and (b) identify the principal options for managing those issues and the implications of those options.

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

3) The infrastructure strategy must outline how the local authority intends to manage its infrastructure assets, taking into account the need to—

• i. renew or replace existing assets; and
• ii. respond to growth or decline in the demand for services reliant
• n those assets; and
• iii. allow for planned increases or decreases in levels of service

provided through those assets; and

• iv. maintain or improve public health and environmental outcomes
• r mitigate adverse effects on them; and
• v. provide for the resilience of infrastructure assets by identifying

and managing risks relating to natural hazards and by making appropriate financial provision for those risks.

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

3) The infrastructure strategy must outline how the local authority intends to manage its infrastructure assets, taking into account the need to—

• i. renew or replace existing assets; and
• ii. respond to growth or decline in the demand for services reliant
• n those assets; and
• iii. allow for planned increases or decreases in levels of service

provided through those assets; and

• iv. maintain or improve public health and environmental outcomes
• r mitigate adverse effects on them; and
• v. provide for the resilience of infrastructure assets by identifying

and managing risks relating to natural hazards and by making appropriate financial provision for those risks.

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

4) The infrastructure strategy must outline the most likely scenario for the management of the local authority’s infrastructure assets over the period of the strategy and, in that context, must— (a) show indicative estimates of the projected capital and

• perating expenditure associated with the management of

those assets— (i) in each of the first 10 years covered by the strategy; and (ii) in each subsequent period of 5 years covered by the strategy; and

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

4) The infrastructure strategy must outline the most likely scenario for the management of the local authority’s infrastructure assets over the period of the strategy and, in that context, must— (a) show indicative estimates of the projected capital and

• perating expenditure associated with the management of

those assets— (i) in each of the first 10 years covered by the strategy; and (ii) in each subsequent period of 5 years covered by the strategy; and

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

4) The infrastructure strategy must outline . . . continued (b) identify— (i) the significant decisions about capital expenditure the local authority expects it will be required to make; and (ii) when the local authority expects those decisions will be required; and (iii) for each decision, the principal options the local authority expects to have to consider; and (iv) the approximate scale or extent of the costs associated with each decision; and

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

4) The infrastructure strategy must outline . . . continued (c) include the following assumptions on which the scenario is based: (i) the assumptions of the local authority about the life cycle of significant infrastructure assets: (ii) the assumptions of the local authority about growth or decline in the demand for relevant services: (iii) the assumptions of the local authority about increases

• r decreases in relevant levels of service; and

Infrastructure strategy: Clause 101B Contd

4) The infrastructure strategy must outline . . . continued (d) if assumptions referred to in paragraph (c) involve a high level of uncertainty,— (i) identify the nature of that uncertainty; and (ii) include an outline of the potential effects of that uncertainty.

Infrastructure Strategy and BCA

• The Infrastructure Strategy is a mandatory

statutory requirement for local authorities

• The BCA is a required practice process as part of

the implementation of the ONRC

• The BCA requirements parallel the requirements
• f the Infrastructure Strategy
• Ideally the BCA strategic case should fall out of

the 30 year infrastructure strategy.

Current form of Infrastructure Strategies

• The current 30 year Infrastructure Strategies are the first

since the mandatory requirements were implemented under the Local Government Act

• Many councils developed their Infrastructure Strategies as

a compliance exercise

• In many cases this was achieved by simply extending the

current expenditure out for 30 years

• As a consequence a number of Infrastructure Strategies are

not based on robust long-term analyses of infrastructural asset and investment requirements

Linkages to other Strategies

Extract from OAG Publication

2014 publications / Water and roads: Funding and management challenges / Part 2: How infrastructure assets are currently managed

Other Linkages

The 30 year infrastructure strategy

• informs the LTP
• responds to the District Plan and other council

strategy documents

• provides the overview for AMP investment

Opportunities – Infrastructure Strategies and BCA

• The BCA strategic case exercise and process

provides a good starting point for developing more robust 30 year infrastructure strategies

• A robust 30 year Infrastructure Strategy will

underpin future BCA exercises and provide long-term understanding of the road network needs

Workshop Session Self-assessment – 30 year Infrastructure Strategy

• Score your 30 year Transport infrastructure

Strategy against the Assessment Statements

• Calculate your total score
• Tell us how you fared and what you intend to

do with your strategy

RCA & HNO Strategic Case in BCA AMP (ALT1) - Presentations

• Purpose: to share the initial development of

the strategic case.

State highway business case

Activity management plan, lessons learnt, next steps

State highway context in 2013/14

• All state highways had fit for purpose classifications and

associated outcome focussed level of service targets similar to the One Network Road Classification framework

• The technical performance targets of the Network

Outcome Contracts are similar to the technical measures in the One Network Road Classification

• The business case approach was being implemented
• We operate a “nationally planned, regionally delivered”
• perating model to ensure we consistently deliver

customer services efficiently across the nationwide network.

Documents developed for 2015/18

Detailed case for pavement maintenance Strategic case for activity management plan Strategic case for resilience Strategic case for high productivity motor vehicles Strategic case for safer roads State highway activity management plan

Strategic case for activity management plan

• The Government Policy Statement on Land

transport gives strategic guidance and objectives for state highways

• There were significant service gaps on the classified

State highway network

• Engagement with customers and stakeholders

revealed priorities well aligned with service gaps and GPS priorities

• An Investment Logic Map was developed as a key

step in developing the plan

• Senior staff were involved to give weight to the plan

Strategic case for activity management plan

Focus area cases

• Strategic cases were developed for priority focus

areas.

• These provided insights on a consistent nationwide

basis for key aspects of programme so that our subsequent investments were synchronised, cohesive and efficient.

• They replaced the former piecework approach.
• They provided focus for key aspects of the Activity

Management plan related to priorities within the GPS and for customers

Strategic case for safer roads Strategic case for high productivity motor vehicles Strategic case for resilience

Detailed case for pavements

• A detailed case was produced for pavement

maintenance

• This acts as a reference document for the State

highway activity management plan

• It supplies or references the evidence and analysis

supporting

• the approach to pavement maintenance and renewal
• The effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed

works program

• The Activity Management Plan can carry a simpler

story and not be cluttered by technical detail

Detailed case for pavement maintenance

Programme business case - AMP

• The State highway Activity Management

Plan 2015/18 is the programme case for the planned works

• It reflects the strategic cases and

summarises the detailed case for pavement maintenance

• It was reviewed and endorsed as a suitable

business case by the Transport Agency

State highway activity management plan

Programme case - problems

• There are significant gaps between the

targeted and current levels of service that warrant significant investment and changed operational management to improve customer service, particularly those related to safety, travel time reliability, congestion and resilience.

State highway activity management plan

• Significant challenges exist in

continually improving network maintenance efficiency to achieve the optimum sustainable level of work and long term cost, while delivering targeted customer service levels on a network that has significant ongoing growth in size and complexity and freight demand.

• The plan reflects two problem

statements, one for improvements and

• ne for maintenance, these are

summarised below.

Lessons learnt

• The business case approach focussed effort
• n the core issues.
• The classified state highway network and
• utcome targets focussed proposed works

where they had greatest impact, and clarified the approach to risk within the maintenance program.

Indicative approach for 2018/21

• We are now reviewing the 2015/18 business

case to ensure that it remains relevant. We expect little change.

• We have commenced development of the

2018/21 Activity Management Plan.

Further developments for 2018/21

• Full adoption of the One Network Road Classification and

customer levels of service as our targets

• Continued improvement of the capability, technical and cultural

aspects of our business to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of our activity management and complete our adoption of the One Network Road Classification and Business Case Approach

Questions?

PoE & Self-assessment (ALT1)

• Purpose: to ensure we understand what is

required to develop your BCA AMP.

PoE & Self-assessment

• NZTA P&I Presentation

– Purpose: to provide RCAs with learning from national PoE discussions to help improve understanding and develop a common vision.

• RCA Presentations

– Purpose: to share learning from completing the self- assessment and PoE with regional peers.

NZTA FEEDBACK ON POINT OF ENTRY DISCUSSIONS ON IMPLEMENTING BUSINESS CASE INTO ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT PLANS

• Combined Point of Entry with Timaru, Ashburton, MacKenzie

District and Waimate District Council;

• Combined Context - majority of road network is rural, relatively

flat/slow population growth (some negative growth in certain locations), some tourism growth; and growth in agricultural production and freight traffic;

• All the Council’s existing AMP’s reviewed to determine if the

principles/fundamentals of the business case were evident i.e. – were the problem/issues for the district well defined; – were the consequences and scale of the issues on the managing the asset well articulated and prioritised; – Were the issues well evidenced and well understood or are there gaps in information

South Canterbury PoE (Caroline Hutchinson)

• Biggest Universal Issue/Gap in AMPs - Increasing Heavy Vehicle numbers and

changing agricultural use (diary conversion):

• However, the scale of change and the consequence not well understood

yet;

• Identified the need to have conversations with the agricultural industry

and appropriate stakeholders - how this is done is yet to be finalised, but all four Council’s can work together to minimise resource and use time efficiently

• Other Issues Identified in AMPs:
• Bridges renewals;
• ‘asset retreat’ – i.e. potential need to stop maintaining some assets;
• Community Expectations;
• ‘Bow – Waves’ in upcoming renewals;
• Growth in tourism;
• Environmental impacts i.e. stormwater/flood events;
• Road safety;
• Sustainable transport use;
• Funding and affordability.

South Canterbury PoE (Caroline Hutchinson)

• Issues are in the AMP’s, but need to be brought to the forefront (tend to be

buried away in appendix) and better explained, well evidenced and prioritised;

• Scale of issues and the consequences on the network not always clear:

– For example, an increasing aging population in the district – so what! What is the proportion of this age group against all others and what is the consequence

• n maintaining the network?

– For example, is agricultural growth concentrated across the whole district or certain parts? If so where, and what is the consequence for that part of the district;

• Need a better link between Strategic Direction (i.e. community outcomes, GPS

priorities, ONRC objectives etc. which just tend to be listed in AMPs) and the benefits of achieving the key issues for the district. Making the links gives your programme transparency: – For example, the benefit of addressing a key strategic bridge resilience issue would enable Council meet ONRC goals, and GPS economic growth and productivity goals and associated community outcomes.

• Issues don’t have to be all about economic, infrastructure and social issues i.e. lack
• f good data on the network can constrain the ability to plan well, the lack of a

good network and monitoring information systems could be a ‘headline’ issue;

Wider All-Round Observations from AMP PoE Discussions so far

• Where there are key gaps in understanding the issues this is

where having wider conversations with appropriate stakeholders is important. Other more well defined issues developed through documentation and previous processes may not need the same level of engagement;

• Not necessarily a big job to change/amend AMPs (bones are

good)

• Not the purpose of the PoE discussions to get into technical detail
• r options for responding to the issues. However, development of

the AMP should have a robust look at all options and responses to addressing issues

• The Strategic Direction in your AMP is NOT your Strategic
• Assessment. Your strategic assessment is about ‘issues’, and they

may not always align to strategic directions i.e. issues should drive your programme and responses.

Wider All-Round Observations from AMP PoE Discussions so far

Difference between Strategic Assessment, Strategic Direction and Strategic Context

Central Otago District Council Example Issues/Challenges (Strategic Assessment) Addressing the Issue meets the following Strategic Directions (makes

the strategic objective in your AMP meaningful)

Strategic Context (more around the type

• f network and physical environment you

manage, along with key stats)

Issue: The affordability and resilience of our aging bridges network Cause of Issue: Given age of our bridges many of them are requiring significant investment Consequence of Issue: The bridge network connects the rural district and enables access for the community. Not prioritising better information to manage this asset will hinder economic growth and the resilience of our network, with potential large investment outlays in future years Benefit of Addressing Issue: Enable us to plan more efficiently and prioritise funding works

• ver time to avoid bigger long term costs and provide a reliable

network to our customers (Link the benefit to the strategic outcome) Evidence: Gap in information currently on state of our bridges Response: Commissioning detailed structural inspection and impact assessments within next 3 years GPS Goals

• Economic Growth and

Productivity

• Road Safety
• Value for Money

ONRC

• Reliability
• Resilience
• Accessibility

Community Outcomes:

• Thriving Economy
• A safe and Healthy

Community 1,739km Rural Road 147km Urban Road 175 Bridges Population Growth 1% per annum High level of resident satisfaction Aging population increasing

Do I need a PoE Conversation now?

• At the very LEAST you need to be clear about what the

key issues are for your district and make sure you have good evidence and understanding of those;

• If you have major gaps in understanding this may signal

the need to be having discussions with key stakeholders and partners;

• As a co-funder you need to bring NZTA in on this

process, whatever you decide that to be, sooner rather than later

Workshop Session

• Purpose: To develop/update a draft
• utline for your strategic case.

– Utilise: CODCs example and your Strategic Case outline

The next steps…

Christchurch CC – linking problem statements to strategies

Transport System Relationships

RCA Planning Processes

Activity Management Plans

Regional Transport Programme National Land Transport Programme

(NZTA Investment & Revenue Strategy)

Operational Delivery

(Operations & maintenance / Capital works)

Strategic Direction Government Policy Statement Community / User Input

Investment Decision Making

State Highway Plans Council Annual & Long Term Plans Network Planning LEGISLATION CUSTOMER PROMISE ONE NETWORK ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Functional Classification Network Operating Plan Road Function Road Design & Form

USERS

Business Case Approach

Transition Plan Review

• How are you tracking?
• What needs to be updated?
• What was missing and needs to

be added?

• Consider your gaps? Strategic

problems to CLoS/PM, data, etc.

Action Learning Tasks and R5

Summary and Close

• Review

– List of expectations – Tabled items (if any)

• Feedback on the workshop? How can we improve it?
• Next Steps

Erik Barnes

PO Box 2764, Wakatipu, Queenstown 9349 M: 021 997 863

erik@auxilium.co.nz

Erik Barnes

PO Box 2764, Wakatipu, Queenstown 9349 M: 021 997 863

erik@auxilium.co.nz

Chris Olsen

8 Moray Place Papakowhai Porirua 5024 P: 04 2339697 M: 0274 477098

chris@coconsulting.co.nz

Chris Olsen

8 Moray Place Papakowhai Porirua 5024 P: 04 2339697 M: 0274 477098

chris@coconsulting.co.nz

David Fraser

10 Bayview Drive Waiuku 2123

P: +64 9 2357245 M: 027 4739493

david@amsaam.co.nz

David Fraser

10 Bayview Drive Waiuku 2123

P: +64 9 2357245 M: 027 4739493

david@amsaam.co.nz