PROJECT DELIVERY MODELS ARKANSAS PLANNING RETREAT ON P3S. J. Douglas Koelemay, Director October 7, 2015

Similar documents
PARTNERSHIPS ACCELERATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & JOB CREATION. J. Douglas Koelemay, Director

TRB/AASHTO Environment & Energy Research Conference June 6-9, 2010 Session 47: Lessons Learned from P3 Public Involvement Initiatives

Build America Transportation Investment Center. Office of the Secretary U.S. Department of Transportation

North Carolina Turnpike Authority Joint Appropriations Committee on Transportation Beau Memory & Rodger Rochelle

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Route 3 South Managed Lanes Project DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY

VIRGINIA S P3 PROGRAM

Overview of the Procurement and Project Milestones

Public-Private Partnership Program May 2015 Transit Coalition Update

APPENDIX D CHECKLIST FOR PROPOSALS

Innovative Project Finance

November 4, 2013 Office of Transportation Public Private Partnerships

NCDOT Planning Summary for NCTA Projects

Appendix 5 Freight Funding Programs

Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, HIGH DESERT CORRIDOR

SMART SCALE Policy Guide

Toll Project Development Policy. Mark Boggs, P.E.

Economic Vitality and Quality of Life Unlocking Hampton Roads HRTAC Overview Kevin B. Page Executive Director

Traditional v. Negotiated Procurement. Malcolm T. Kerley, P.E. Capital Beltway HOT Lanes PPTA Advisory Panel December 4, 2003

Financing Transit Projects with Traditional and Innovative Sources And Mechanisms

HB2 Update October, 2014

Purpose. Funding. Eligible Projects

Update on Transportation Funding and Potential Sources for Additional Revenue. June 19, 2017

Appendix E Federal and State Funding Categories

I-69 Corridor Segment Committee 1 and 2 Kick-off Meeting April 15 Nacogdoches, Texas

DEPARTMENT OF RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION REPORT ON AUDIT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2005

May 22, Pamela Bailey-Campbell. Vice President - North America Infrastructure Consultancy Jacobs Engineering, Inc.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement, I-495 & I-270 Managed

An Analysis of the Evolution of the Public-Private Transportation Act of 1995

9. Positioning Ports for Grant Funding and Government Loan Programs

Staff Approve Resolution R to amend the FY TIP.

Local Taxes and Highway Tolls: The New Normal

HB2 Quick Guide To view the latest version of the HB2 Policy Guide:

S E N A T E F I S C A L O F F I C E I S S U E B R I E F 2016-S RhodeWorks FEBRUARY 2, 2016

Strategic Projects Division

MINISTÈRE DES TRANSPORTS, DE LA MOBILITÉ DURABLE ET DE L ÉLECTRIFICATION DES TRANSPORTS

Public-Private Partnerships for Transportation

I-66 Inside the Beltway Initial Traffic Analysis and Framework Agreement

Highway and Light Rail Public-Private Partnerships in the U.S.: Protecting the Public Interest

ORIGINAL. Public Private Transportation Proposal USR 460. Richmond PROPOSER. September 14, 2006 TEAM MEMBERS

Transportation. Fiscal Research Division. March 24, Justification Review

Federal Public Transportation Program: In Brief

Federal Tolling & Pricing Programs: MAP-21 Changes

Route 58 PPTA Project Finance Plan Annual Update Hillsville to Stuart Corridor. Submitted By:

SBCAG STAFF REPORT. Senate Bill 1 (SB1) State Funding Strategy for U.S. 101 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane and Parallel Projects

CHAPTER House Bill No. 5013

TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES (TA) SET ASIDE PROGRAM July 2016

Central Florida Expressway Authority Multimodal Investment Assessment Status Report and Update

NC General Statutes - Chapter 136 Article 19 1

Welcome to the WebEx. The presentation for the 2018 Unified Transportation Program (UTP) Public Meeting will begin shortly.

GEORGE MASSEY TUNNEL REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Public Private Partnerships and Transit Not Just for Mega Projects Karin DeMoors October 28, 2015

2016 DOT Discretionary Grants

STIP. Van Argabright November 9, 2017

HRBT Expansion Project Information Meeting. January 19, 2018

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of July 14, 2018

Public Sites Development Framework

Interstate Tolling for Wisconsin: Why and How

Future Trends & Themes Summary. Presented to Executive Steering Committee: April 12, 2017

Update on HB2 Preparation. Presentation to FAMPO May, 2016

SUMMARY OF THE GROW AMERICA ACT As Submitted to Congress on April 29, 2014

Transportation Planning in the Denver Region

PROJECT SELECTION Educational Series

Transportation Planning & Investment in Urban North Carolina

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Transportation and the Federal Government

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM

US TOLL ROAD REDUX RAYMOND H. ELLIS, MANAGING DIRECTOR DMJM HARRIS, AECOM TECHNOLOGY CORP.

FHWA/USDOT Role in Project Finance

RESOLUTION ADOPTINGPRINCIPLES AND APPROVING A LIST OF CANDIDATE PROJECTS AND FUNDING REQUESTS FOR REGIONAL MEASURE 3

FUNDING SOURCES. Appendix I. Funding Sources

Los Angeles County One Gateway Plaza z13.gzz.zooo Tel Metropolitan Transportation Authority Los Angeles, CA gooi2-zp52 metro.net

NAPA COUNTY GRAND JURY

2018 Regional Solicitation for Transportation Projects

Mark A. Doctor, PE CAREER PATH

APPENDIX B BUS RAPID TRANSIT

Puget Sound Gateway Program

Apologies Michael, but lets work off of the attached update version. James Bass came back with a few additional minor tweaks to the language.

State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project Update. State Route 91 Advisory Committee June 4, 2010

NORTHERN VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Massachusetts Transportation Infrastructure Funding Gap: Revenue Alternatives - The Challenge and Potential Solutions

Long Range Transportation Plan

Commonwealth Transportation Board Briefing

SAFETEA-LU. Overview. Background

Project/Report Title: U.S. Surface Transportation Public-Private Partnerships: Objectives and Evidence ABSTRACT

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION REGARDING AN INNOVATIVE PROJECT DELIVERY APPROACH FOR FULL SERVICE COMMERCIAL DRIVER/VEHICLE SERVICES CENTER AND

Puget Sound Gateway Program

ADMINISTRATIVE CODE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Fixing America s Surface Transportation Act: FAST Act Implications for the Region

Transportation Demand Management (TDM)

Transportation Funding Update

County of Fairfax, Virginia

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) Posey County Long Range Transportation Plan

Design-Build Procurement Overview Manual. Alternative Project Delivery

Southern Ridge Wastewater Treatment Study Background, Results, Next Steps

Lorie Tudor, P.E. Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer. Alma Area Chamber of Commerce

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

Attracting Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure Experiences from India

Transcription:

PROJECT DELIVERY MODELS ARKANSAS PLANNING RETREAT ON P3S J. Douglas Koelemay, Director October 7, 2015

VIRGINIA LEADERSHIP IN PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS Virginia and California first P3 legislation in the Nation (1995) PPTA creates flexible procurement authority for certain projects Authorizes contracts with private entities to develop and/or operate transportation facilities when more timely, more efficient or less costly (more value for money) Encourages private investment Federal oversight, state oversight, Virginia FOIA requirements remain VAP3 Office 2010 Goal is to build strategic program, extend VAP3 leadership

VIRGINIA OFFICE OF PUBLIC- PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS (VAP3)

ADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS Public-private partnerships have the potential to supplement traditional funding (taxes and bond proceeds) and project delivery (Design-Bid-Build) methods. Deliver projects more quickly, especially where entities have limits on traditional tax revenue and bond programs Include life-cycle costs, including O&M Share risks with private partner Attract private financing to supplement & complement public funding Bring private sector financial discipline (investor due diligence, rating agency scrutiny) to project selection and prioritization

VIRGINIA S P3 PORTFOLIO

I-95 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT I-95 Express Lanes opened December 2014 Virginia contribution of $71 million leveraged $925 million project 12,600 local jobs, $1.54 billion economic activity Adds to managed lanes (HOT) system that includes I-495 Express Lanes Virginia s contribution of $409 million leveraged the $1.7 billion I-495 project

I-95 EXPRESS LANES Expand two existing reversible HOV lanes to three lanes for 14 miles Improve the existing two HOV lanes for six miles Build new nine-mile reversible extension of existing HOV lanes Add new or improved access to and from HOV/HOT network at key interchanges

I-495 EXPRESS LANES Add two new Express Lanes in each direction HOV-3 and buses travel free Non-HOV tolled Congestion-based tolls Transit/Carpool lanes on the Beltway for the first time Seamless connection with existing HOV Service on I-395/I- 95, I-66 and Dulles Toll Road Replace over $260 million of aging infrastructure, including 52 bridges First major improvement to the Capital Beltway in four decades

ELIZABETH RIVER TUNNEL PROJECT New tunnel -- Norfolk to Portsmouth rehabilitation of 2 existing tunnels Construction of Martin Luther King (MLK) Extension connecting tunnels State provided $581 million for $2.1 billion project All 11 tunnel elements immersed Electrical, mechanical, lighting, fireproofing -- Construction of egress corridor and road surface On time, on budget

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNTABILITY COMMISSION VAP3-developed capital planning tool allows regional body to evaluate scenarios of project mix, prioritization, financing and delivery. Run multiple scenarios to see the cause and effect of different assumptions Forecast project costs, revenues and funding availability Informs decisions on project and program delivery

TRANSFORM I-66 MANAGED LANES PROJECT Multimodal Improvements 25 miles East from U.S. 15 to I-495 3 General Purpose Lanes, 2 Express Lanes (variable toll) each direction Rapid bus and HOV free Park and ride facilities Request for Qualifications Fall 2015 Federal Tier 2 NEPA approval Late 2015 Construction 2017

PPTA PROJECT DELIVERY FRAMEWORK *Parties to be notified and briefed upon request after the Oversight Board decision: Chairs of General Assembly committees MPO s Interested members of General Assembly Special interest groups Regulatory Agencies Public Briefing Focus: Detail-Level Screening Report Desirability as P3 Feasibility as P3 HB 2 Prioritization Duration of P3 development and procurement Briefing Focus: RFI results (as appropriate) Schedule Refresh on the high points from Project Development Preliminary Procurement documents Risk Analysis and Value-for-Money Estimated project cost Potential public subsidy Potential economic benefits Preliminary Business Points Initial Finding of Public Interest Draft and Final Contract Documents posted on P3 Website for review & comment Final Contract Documents posted on P3 Website Briefing Focus: Major Business Points Updated Risk Allocation & Management Plan Statutory Audit results Final Value-for-Money Analysis Updated economic benefits Project bid results Public subsidy (if required) Final Finding of Public Interest

HIGH-LEVEL SCREENING CRITERIA 1. Can state transfer risk? 2. Does state have a need for funding requirement? 3. Can the potential project raise private capital? 4. Can the state agency effectively leverage private sector innovation and expertise? 5. Is a partnership consistent with Federal requirements? 6. Can state accelerate project development? 7. Can a partnership satisfy the public transportation need? 8. Does the potential project address priorities in state, regional or local transportation plans? 9. Are there project efficiencies possible through a publicprivate partnership?

DETAIL LEVEL SCREENING QUESTIONS Does the project address the needs outlined in the local, regional and state transportation plans? Will the project enhance economic development efforts? What is the extent of support or opposition for the project? Are there any legislative concerns about tolling, user fees or use of public funds? Is the proposed schedule for project completion clearly outlined and feasible? Is the project s technical approach based on proven technology? Is the project consistent with applicable state and federal statutes and regulations? Is the proposed project consistent with environmental statutes and regulations? Is the project compatible with local land use and comprehensive plans? Are public funds required and clearly stated? Is the preliminary financial plan feasible? Are there any particular risks unique to the project? Is the proposed term of concession consistent with market demand? Does it provide a Best Value solution for the state? Is the proposed term optimal for a whole-life approach? Does the project include a process for long-term performance management, inventory and hand back provisions?

P3 RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES Goal is to Enhance Accountability and Responsibility How to identify risks, quantify probability and potential impact of risks and consider mitigation strategies and allocations How to eliminate, avoid, transfer or share risks Importance of risk workshops with experienced professionals Importance of continuously updated risk register, professional/flexible contract management for life of project

P3 RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

TYPICAL RISK ALLOCATIONS FOR A HIGHWAY PROJECT