 |
Re: Finally, High Speed PPP Rail Service to Las Vegas!
Author: BOB2
Date: 11-21-2012 - 21:27
Mook,
There have been a number of private-public-partnership PPP or 3P discussions over the last six or seven years on highway projects like the 710 Tunnel and the High Desert Corridor. Technically DX=VXX would be privately funded variation of a PPR, but with Federal loan guarantees, and preferential bond treatment.
The lack of a clear Federal or State policy on putting out fully "concession" or "franchise" based investor funded PPP's has been a significant problem in enticing these potential highway investments. The renewal of the Federal Transportation bill failed to deal with this and even had factions opposing the use of tolls on trucks to pay for any of these investments.
The biggest failure of PPP options for HSR in California comes from the bizarre political decisions and misplanning involved in the CHSRA fiasco, at least until recently.
How could PPP's work for rail at a project level you might ask. Well, a few years ago I worked on a potential PPP option that would pay for the Union Station run through project which would be financed on a per movement charge, based on monetization of part of the operational savings from that improvement.
Turnkey PPP projects, in which some financing and construction risk is taken on by contractors, and thus innovations that save costs are rewarded, is another area of potential PPP activity. But, once again, due to the lack of clear policies, and the politicized world of the "change order" driven infrastructure contracting regime, this option has been severely limited in its use, even though this could clearly potentially encourage more private investment, and lower project delivery costs.
Pogo was right: "We have met the enemy and it is us."
BOB2
There have been a number of private-public-partnership PPP or 3P discussions over the last six or seven years on highway projects like the 710 Tunnel and the High Desert Corridor. Technically DX=VXX would be privately funded variation of a PPR, but with Federal loan guarantees, and preferential bond treatment.
The lack of a clear Federal or State policy on putting out fully "concession" or "franchise" based investor funded PPP's has been a significant problem in enticing these potential highway investments. The renewal of the Federal Transportation bill failed to deal with this and even had factions opposing the use of tolls on trucks to pay for any of these investments.
The biggest failure of PPP options for HSR in California comes from the bizarre political decisions and misplanning involved in the CHSRA fiasco, at least until recently.
How could PPP's work for rail at a project level you might ask. Well, a few years ago I worked on a potential PPP option that would pay for the Union Station run through project which would be financed on a per movement charge, based on monetization of part of the operational savings from that improvement.
Turnkey PPP projects, in which some financing and construction risk is taken on by contractors, and thus innovations that save costs are rewarded, is another area of potential PPP activity. But, once again, due to the lack of clear policies, and the politicized world of the "change order" driven infrastructure contracting regime, this option has been severely limited in its use, even though this could clearly potentially encourage more private investment, and lower project delivery costs.
Pogo was right: "We have met the enemy and it is us."
BOB2
