Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

RV 2014: Public Private Partnerships: The P3 Experience by Gregory Benz

618 views

Published on

Public-Private Partnerships: The P3 Experience AICP CM 1.5
Public-private partnerships (P3s) are on the upswing. After a strong start with vertical building delivery in the US and many transit projects in Canada, the P3 model for transit seems to be here to stay. Upcoming projects in Baltimore and Denver are piquing interest across the US. Is P3 right for your project? How have recent projects fared? Listen as panel members explore recent applications, trends and benefits of the P3 delivery method. Learn how to assess your own project in terms of the P3 model. Hear how P3 is helping accomplish broader community development, sustainability and mobility goals throughout North America.
Moderator: Bob Post, Vice President, Director of Transportation, URS, Portland, Oregon
Charles Wheeler, Senior Project Manager, URS, Richmond Hill, Ontario
Gregory P. Benz, RA, AICP, Senior Vice President, Principal, Professional Associate, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Baltimore, Maryland
Martin Nielsen, MAIBC, LEED AP, MRAIC, P.Eng., Principal, Dialog Design, Vancouver, British Columbia

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

RV 2014: Public Private Partnerships: The P3 Experience by Gregory Benz

  1. 1. Rail-Volution Greg Benz October 23, 2014
  2. 2. The Purple Line Corridor is a 16-mile east-west corridor from Bethesda to New Carrollton 2
  3. 3. The Purple Line Project will serve six underserved major activity centers Bethesda Silver Spring UMD College Park Takoma/Langley Park Riverdale Park New Carrollton 3
  4. 4. The Purple Line provides Intermodal Connectivity • Links 4 branches of the Metro – Red Line at Bethesda – Red Line at Silver spring – Green Line at College Park – Orange Line at New Carrollton • Connects to all three MARC lines – Brunswick at Silver Spring – Camden Line at College Park – Penn Line at New Carrollton • Connects to Amtrak Northeast Corridor at New Carrollton 4
  5. 5. Project Status • NEPA – Signed Record of Decision • FTA New Starts – Approved for Entry into Engineering – Recommended for FFGA • Medium-High rating • $900M • P3 Solicitation – Four shortlisted teams – Final RFP issued – Proposals/bids dues in January 2015 5
  6. 6. Key Reasons for Using a P3 for Purple Line • Operational factors – Natural stand-alone asset – P3 approach will also increase the likelihood of consistently excellent, highly responsive service • Risk transfer efficiencies – P3 will integrate various project elements into a single agreement that clearly outlines the optimal allocation of project risk between the public and private partners • Whole life-cycle planning and cost optimization – P3 will provide greater incentive to make investment decisions that are optimized over the life of the asset. • Schedule discipline – Strong incentives for the concessionaire to maintain schedule discipline during asset delivery • Enhanced opportunities for innovation – P3 will provide the private sector with opportunities and incentives to propose enhancements to the asset design and delivery approach that could benefit long-term operating and maintenance performance • Potential financial value – Due to the operational benefits, risk transfer efficiencies, life-cycle planning, scheduling discipline, and innovation opportunities of the P3 approach, there is potential for long-term financial savings relative to a traditional project delivery approach
  7. 7. MTA Is Retaining Primary Responsibility for Certain Elements • Public Information, Communications and Involvement • General Terms of Third Party Agreements • Right of Way Acquisition • Fare Policy, Farebox Revenue and Ridership Risks • Transit Oriented Development Activities Not Included in Project (or P3) 7
  8. 8. How Key Objectives Are Addressed in P3 • Service Quality & Reliability • Station Planning/Aesthetics • Community Commitments • 3rd Party Agreements • ROD Commitments 8
  9. 9. Provide Service Quality & Reliability 9 • Defined Headways & Loading Standards • Availability Payment Mechanism – Deductions • Missed trips • Headway non-achievement • Cleanliness • Equipment availability Vehicle Availability Non-Conformance Event Non-Conformance Factor Un-sequenced Train – Peak (Vehicle Bunching) 0.80 Late Train – Off-Peak (More than 5 min) 0.80 Late Train – Off-Peak (More than 7.5 min) 1.10 Late Train – Off-Peak (More than 10 min) 1.30 Short Train 1.30 Early Departure – Off-Peak (15 seconds) 1.30 Incomplete Trip (Never reaches scheduled Terminal) 2.50 Missed Trip (Never departs scheduled Terminal) 2.50
  10. 10. Assure Station Site Planning/Aesthetics • Proscriptive Contract Drawings and Technical Provisions – Versus typical performance provisions for rest of facilities, systems and equipment/vehicles 10
  11. 11. Honor Commitments • Community Agreements • 3rd Party Agreements • FEIS/ROD Commitments Included in RFP as contract documents • Concessionaire’s/owners’ responsibilities defined • Interfaces defined • Construction phase incentive/penalty clauses 11
  12. 12. Summary • P3 is Not: – Free $$ – Public sector turning over project to private interests • P3 RFP/Contract Needs to Clearly Define – Owners vs Concessionaire roles – Proscriptive vs performance aspects • Achieve objectives • Achieve innovation and D/B & life cycle efficiency • Honor commitments 12

×