magor rest area objections -...
TRANSCRIPT
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 1
Magor Rest Area objections
Objection Refs OBJ0026 (Roadchef) & OBJ0292 (Rontec)
File Refs WG/REB/OBJ0026 +OBJ0292-BWo
Response to Objectors’ Evidence: Roadchef – Construction Cost Aspects
Rontec – Construction Cost Aspects
Adran yr Economi a’r Seilwaith Department for Economy and Infrastructure
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 2
Author 3
Scope and Purpose of this Proof of evidence 4
SCHEME and ALTERNATIVES REBUTTAL 6
3.1. Introduction 6
3.2. Scheme and Alternatives Cost Estimates 6
3.3. Commercial in Confidence 7
3.4. Costain Vinci Joint Venture Pricing Approach (Published Costs) 7
3.5. SPON’s Civil Engineering and Highways Works Price Book 2016’Limitations 8
3.6. Vectos Cost Estimate 9
CONCLUSIONS – SCHEME AND ALTERNATIVES REBUTTAL 15
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 3
AUTHOR
1.1 I am Barry Woodman. I am a Director of Costain who are a major United
Kingdom Contractor and the Project Director of the Costain Vinci Joint
Venture. My professional qualifications are set out in my main proof of
evidence and are not repeated here.
1.2 The evidence which I have prepared and provide in this proof of
evidence has been prepared and is given in accordance with the
guidance of my professional institution and I confirm that the opinions
expressed are my true and professional opinions.
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 4
SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THIS PROOF OF EVIDENCE
2.1 This proof of evidence addresses matters raised by objectors concerning
the rest area or motorway service area at Magor just off junction 23A of
the existing and proposed new motorway.
2.2 Roadchef and Rontec have submitted Statements in Evidence in relation
to the draft statutory Orders associated with the Welsh Government’s
proposals for the M4 Corridor around Newport (the Scheme), which has
been received via the Programme Officer.
2.3 The evidence of Roadchef and Rontec is provided in several volumes
from different witnesses as follows:
i. Mr Simon Turl, Roadchef (OBJ0026) - – Main and Supplementary evidence dated February and June 2017
ii. Dr Ian McKay, Roadchef (OBJ0026) - – Main and Supplementary evidence dated February and June 2017
iii. Mr Mike Axon, Vectos, on behalf of Roadchef (OBJ0026) – Main and Supplementary evidence dated February and June 2017
iv. Mr Henry Church, CBRE, on behalf of Rontec (OBJ0292)
2.4 This evidence will respond to the points raised in the evidence of
Roachef’s Mike Axton where it relates to the construction costs for the
Scheme: the M4 Corridor around Newport (hereafter referred to as the
Scheme), comprising a proposed new dual three lane motorway to the
south of Newport and complementary measures.
2.5 My evidence will also respond to the construction cost aspects of the
alternative routes that Roadchef has proposed.
2.6 Aspects of my evidence interface with the evidence of other witnesses
including Matthew Jones (WG1.1.1, WG 1.1.6), Bryan Whittaker
(WG1.2.1, WG 1.2.6), Stephen Bussell (WG1.3.1, WG 1.3.5), Ben Sibert
(WG 1.5.5), Dr Peter Ireland (WG1.7.1, WG 1.7.4) and John Davies (WG
1.23.1 and WG 1.23.4).
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 5
2.7 For simplicity of reference, throughout my evidence I will refer to the
following abbreviations:
a) ECI Early Contractor Involvement
b) Scheme M4 Corridor around Newport
c) DJV Design Joint Venture (Arup and Atkins)
d) SPON’s SPON’s Civil Engineering and Highways Works
Price Book 2016
e) PLI Public Local Inquiry
f) CVJV Costain Vinci Joint Venture
g) SU Statutory Utilities
2.8 My evidence is presented in the following structure, with a detailed
contents provided at the start of the document.
1. Author
2. Scope and Purpose of this Proof of evidence
3. Scheme and Alternatives Rebuttal:
4. Scheme and Alternatives Rebuttal - Conclusions
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 6
SCHEME AND ALTERNATIVES REBUTTAL
3.1. Introduction
The objectors’ evidence makes several statements about the cost
estimation of their proposed alternatives, westbound on slip and the
proposed eastbound off slip.
In the following sections of my rebuttal evidence, I will address specific
points raised by the objectors in their evidence where they are within
my area of expertise.
3.2. Scheme and Alternatives Cost Estimates
Mike Axon’s Supplementary Proof of Evidence dated June 2017 raises
the following points;
Page 2 Point 8
‘WG has provided construction cost estimates for elements of Junction 23 and Junction 23A6. WG is not able to provide the evidential basis for those costs for reasons of “commercial in confidence.’
Page 2 Point 9
‘Vectos has refined its cost estimates for the eastbound and westbound slip roads at Junction 23A based on publicly available industry standard evidence. It has revised its estimates for Objectors’ Suggested Alternatives (OSA) 8 to 11. These are set out in Appendix MAS 1.’
Page 2 Point 10
‘The Vectos cost estimates are, in the main, substantially lower than the WG estimates. They estimate the cost of the eastbound slip road in the order of £1.0 to £2.2m, and the westbound slip road in the order of £5.0 to £8.0m’.
Page 23 Point 13
‘The cost of providing both eastbound and westbound slip roads could be as little as ‘less than £5.4m’ over and above the Scheme cost of £1.093m (0.5%).’
Page 23 Point 14
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 7
‘Even on the basis of the WG’s assessment, the evidence for which is not consistent with the industry rates, and has not been made available for me to test, the cost is ‘less than 14.5m’ (1.3%).’
Appendix MAS 1, Cost Summary Note
‘The Works Cost calculations for each of the RoadChef alternative
options are calculated using the Approximate Estimating Rates from
SPON’s Civil Engineering and Highways Works Price Book 2016’
The principal points from the above will be address in the following
sections as follows;
Commercial in Confidence
Costain Vinci Joint Venture Pricing Approach
SPON’s Limitations
Vectos Cost Estimate
3.3. Commercial in Confidence
The rates and prices used to assess the cost of the alternatives
proposed by Vectos have been obtained in open competition from the
supply chain who will deliver the various elements of the scheme
should it proceed to construction. It would clearly be inappropriate to
publicly disclose these rates at this time as it would prejudice the
commercial position of preferred suppliers in future negotiations. The
public interest is served by maintaining confidentiality in relation to such
matters.
3.4. Costain Vinci Joint Venture Pricing Approach (Published Costs)
The Costain Vinci Joint Venture were awarded the ECI contract to take
the Scheme through the Publication of Draft Orders, Local Public
Inquiry and construction if the scheme proceeds. This Tender was won
in 2014 competitively against a range of national and international
contractors bidding for the tender. The tendered rates have been used
to price the Scheme as well as the alternatives proposed by RoadChef,
including the suggested westbound on slip.
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 8
The alternatives proposed by RoadChef including the suggested
westbound on slip have been quantified from the outline design
information provided from the DJV detailing the key structures,
earthworks, drainage, carriageway and finishes additions and
omissions from the base Scheme.
The prices for the proposed RoadChef alternatives and westbound on
slip have been independently challenged, reviewed and validated by
the Welsh Government advisor’s Arcadis.
I note however that at the time of writing there is ongoing discussion
with Vectos in regard to the design for the west bound on slip provided
by the DJV after it became apparent that the CVJV and Vectos were
preparing costings from different plans and I hope to update the inquiry
in that regard in due course.
3.5. SPON’s Civil Engineering and Highways Works Price Book
2016’Limitations
Vectos have relied upon SPON’s in preparing their costings.
As noted in Mike Axon’s Supplementary Proof of Evidence (OBJ0026-
096a-IN) ‘SPON’s is an industry-wide recognised method to provide a
range of rates for estimating purposes for highways and structural
elements of work’. However, the use of an estimating source such as
SPON’s has limitations in so far as it is a generalisation of a pool of
data across a wide range of schemes. Where Scheme specific detail
and understanding is available a more accurate estimation of the cost
should be used in preference to the rates obtained from SPON’s.
SPON’s does not reflect the specific aspects of the Scheme as follows;
Programme and sequence of the works.
Interface with other activities and stakeholders.
Access and preparation of the works areas.
Contractors risk, although we consider this is currently
accommodated within the 44% optimism bias applied by
both Vectos and CVJV
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 9
Local market conditions, resource availability and skills
constraints.
Specific physical site constraints.
Specific scheme issues such as complex or extensive
Statutory Utilities works or on line working.
The Scheme presents a number of unique challenges
associated with the scale of the project in terms of access
and logistics.
The above factors will introduce inconsistencies and variations to the
prices derived using SPON’s and it is for that reason that costing on the
basis of Scheme specific detail and understanding is more appropriate,
where it is available.
In addition to the Scheme specific issues noted above the following
aspects of the Scheme are considered to be outside the scope of
works covered by the SPON’s rates:
Detailed design costs, typically estimated as a percentage of
the construction cost.
Costs prior to construction associated with the ECI Phase to
implement changes should they be recommended by the PLI
Inspector.
3.6. Vectos Cost Estimate
A review of the cost estimate provided by Vectos in Mike Axon’s
Supplementary Proof of Evidence dated June 2017 has been
undertaken by the CVJV. The approach adopted has been to apply the
Vectos rates derived from SPON’s to the quantities measured by the
CVJV estimating team for the proposed Vectos alternatives and the
proposed eastbound off slip. The estimated costs derived from this
assessment were found to be broadly in line with the costs published
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 10
by the Welsh Government for the Vectos proposed alternatives in the
Objectors’ Suggested Alternative’s Report.
Eastbound Off Slip
The drawing in Appendix A illustrates the alignment used by the CVJV
to assess the cost of the Eastbound Off Slip. This generally accords
with the drawings used by CVJV to assess the costs of the Eastbound
Off Slip
Details of the Vectos costs have not been provided in open
correspondence.
A summary of the CVJV costs approach to the Eastbound Off Slip is
set out in Table 1 below
Following a ‘without prejudice meeting with Vectos on 04/07/17 we
consider the cost difference between the CVJV costs and the Vectos
costs of the Eastbound Off Slip is explained by an underestimation of
the following;
Alterations to the SDR at the new roundabout.
Slip road quantities
Structures / SU Protection
New NMU access track
Allowance for land costs
Design Fee
Table 1
CVJV Quantities and Cost Summary – Eastbound Off Slip
Roadworks 1168 linear metres of carriageway
Structures / SU Protection Wall protection at transmission station
Preliminaries 20%
Land Cost included
Optimism Bias 44%
Design Fee Cost included
CVJV Total Estimated Cost using Vectos Rates
£5,035,107
Vectos Estimated Cost £2.200,000
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 11
Westbound On Slip (CVJV Cutting Alignment)
A summary of the CVJV costs estimate for the Westbound On Slip is
contained in table 2.
The drawing in Appendix A illustrates the alignment used by the CVJV
to assess the cost of the Westbound On Slip.
It became apparent during a “without prejudice meeting” with Vectos on
4 July 2017 that Vectos had estimated their costs from an alignment
that was very different to that used by the CVJV. I understand that the
Welsh Government has concerns about the Vectos suggested
alignment as follows:
additional widening necessary on Llandevenny Rail Bridge
(the width used in the WG iteration is already at maximum
due to Overhead electrification line spacing constraints)
substantial retaining walls are required to separate the on
slip from the mainline of the motorway
the bridge would be approx. 4m higher
the alignment is on embankment for parts of its length and
this would have greater landscape and visual impact
In contrast the WG alignment considers the existing topography, the
relationship with the M4CaN Scheme proposals and constraints such
as the Llandevenny Railway bridge. The vertical alignment was
prepared to avoid retaining walls and minimise landscape and visual
impacts, by assuming cutting rather than embankment, whilst still
providing necessary bridge clearances. WG consider this to be a more
optimal design for costing purposes.
Discussions with Vectos are continuing in order to resolve the issue of
whether the CVJV alignment or the Vectos alignment is more
appropriate to use for costing purposes.
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 12
The CVJV consider the cost difference between the CVJV and Vectos
is explained by;
Underestimation by Vectos of the size of the westbound slip
road bridge passing over the new M4.
Additional earthworks volumes required to form the cutting
from the bridge to the slip road tie in with the new M4 before
Llandevenny Bridge crossing the London to Swansea main
line.
Design Fees
Table 2
CVJV Quantities and Cost Summary – Westbound On Slip
Roadworks 700 linear metres of carriageway
Structures / SU Protection 810 m2 Bridge Deck
Earthworks 87,000 m3 of cut, 18,700 m3 fill
Preliminaries 20%
Land Cost included
Optimism Bias 44%
Design Fee Cost included
CVJV Total Estimated Cost using Vectos Rates
£15,169,782
Vectos Estimated Cost £8,000,000
Westbound On Slip (Vectos Suggested Alignment)
Notwithstanding the above, following the ‘without prejudice meeting
with Vectos on 04/07/17 we have considered the costs that would be
associated with the Vectos suggested alignment for the Westbound On
Slip, which as above we do not believe to be the most appropriate
alignment. A summary of the costs is set out in Table 3 below.
The CVJV consider the cost difference is explained by an;
Underestimation of the size of the westbound slip road
bridge passing over the new M4.
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 13
Underestimation of the length of the slip road extending onto
Llandevenny Railway Bridge
Omission of widening of Llandevenny Railway Bridge.
Adjustment to Network Rail Signal Gantry adjacent to
Llandevenny Railway Bridge
Design Fee
Table 3
Quantities and Cost Summary
Roadworks 770 linear metres of carriageway
Structures 891 m2 of bridge deck
Earthworks and Reinforced Structures
26,000 m3 fill and 675 m2 of wall
Preliminaries 20%
Network Rail costs and signal gantries
Costs included
Land Cost included
Optimism Bias 44%
Design Fee Cost included
CVJV Total Estimated Cost using Vectos Rates
£14,655,466
Vectos Estimated Cost £8,000,000
Alternatives 8, 9 and 10
A comparison of the costs used by the CVJV and Vectos in relation to
Alternatives 8, 9 and 10 is set out in table 4 below, which shows the
differences between the CVJV costs and the Vectos costs.
For comparison purposes a costs estimate has also been prepared
using the CVJV quantities and the SPON’s rates used by Vectos. The
differences between the Vectos and WG costs (both using SPONs)
show that the quantities that have been used by the CVJV are different
to those used by Vectos. Vectos’ quantities are generally less than
CVJV’s and I believe they are underestimated, along with the omission
of design fees.
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 14
The differences between the WG estimates using tendered rates and
those using SPON’s rates indicate that the CVJV rates are generally
lower than SPON’s
Table 4
Vectos Estimate
using SPON’s
(£m)
WG Appraisal
Cost (£m)
WG Quantities
using SPON’s
(£m)
Objectors
Alternative 8
46.66 42.97 59.26
Objectors
Alternative 9
0.81 26.53 38.05
Objectors
Alternative 10
6.15 25.65 26.48
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 15
CONCLUSIONS – SCHEME AND ALTERNATIVES REBUTTAL
The CVJV assessment of the Vectos cost estimate has confirmed the
validity of the CVJV estimates and clearly indicate that Vectos have
underestimated the quantum of the works required using their
estimating methodology. The CVJV initial assessment considers
Vectos are likely to have underestimated their quantities. This could in
part be due to the costing estimates being prepared from different
plans. However, CVJV have developed a costs estimate based on the
plans Vectos appear to have been working from, and these still show
significant differences which are largely due to differnces in quantities
and inclusion of design fees.
The use of SPON’s rates by Vectos is a coarse cost assessment tool
likely to omit and therefore under estimate significant project specific
costs such as design fee, resource availability and local market
conditions. Therefore, we consider the cost estimates prepared by
CVJV as published in the Objectors’ Suggested Alternatives Report to
be an accurate estimate of the expected costs inclusive of the current
Scheme knowledge and Scheme specific factors noted in this
document.
We will continue to work with Vectos to resolve issues between us as
to the appropriate design on which costs estimates should be based
and will update the inquiry in due course.
I confirm that the statement of truth and professional obligations to the
inquiry from my main proof still applies.
Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport Rebuttal Statement
July 0217 Page 16
Appendix A Alignment used by the CVJV to assess the cost of the
Eastbound Off Slip
WTA 11b
20200
20300
20400
20500
20600
20700
20800
20900 21000
21100
21200
21300
B4245 (West)
B4245 (East)
A4810 (North)
A4810 (South)
EB M4 Diverge for service access
WB M4 Merge from service access
90m
M4 CORRIDOR AROUND NEWPORT
ROAD CHEF ALTERNATIVEAT JUNCTION 23
P01
S2FOR INFORMATION
1:1250 AjD
05/07/17
BEB
05/07/17
CCR
05/07/17
SM
05/07/17
P01 AjD BEB CCR05/07/17 First IssueM4CaN - DJV - HGN -
Z5_GEN - SK - CH - 0147
Date
Scale
Drawing Title
Project TitleDrawing Status
DO
NO
T SC
ALE
Date Date DateClient Original Size
Suitability
Milli
met
res
100
100
A1Drawing Number Revision
Location Type Role Number
Project Originator Volume
Designed / Drawn Checked Approved Authorised
Rev. Date Description By Chk'd App'd
Project Team
SAFETY, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTALINFORMATION
In addition to the hazards/risks normally associated with the types of workdetailed on this drawing, note the following significant residual risks(Reference shall also be made to the design hazard log).Construction(Enter "None" if applicable)
Maintenance / Cleaning(Enter "None" if applicable)
Use(Enter "None" if applicable)
Decommissioning / Demolition(Enter "None" if applicable)
© Crown Copyright and database right 2015. OrdnanceSurvey 100021874. Welsh Government.© Hawlfraint a hawliau cronfa ddata'r Goron 2015. RhifTrwydded yr Arolwg Ordnans 100021874.
KEY PLANGENERAL NOTES:
1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
2. ONLY WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE USED, DO NOT SCALE.
3. FOR MAINLINE AND OTHER JUNCTION PLAN AND PROFILES SEE DRAWINGREFERENCES M4CaN-DJV-HGN-ZG_GEN-DR-CH-0071 TO HGN-ZG_GEN-DR-CH-0107.