Public-Private Partnerships CBA-CLE Real Estate Spring Update March 29, Brent E. Butzin Kaplan Kirsch & Rockwell LLP

Similar documents
P3 for Procurement Practitioners. Alfiya Mirzagalyamova and Scott Baker AECOM

Are Canadian P3 models being employed in the U.S. an answer to infrastructure challenges?

Value-added P3 s: two case studies Long Beach Civic Center & Los Angeles Convention Center

Rail-Volution. Public-Private Partnership Overview

TO MEMBERS OF THE FINANCE AND CAPITAL STRATEGIES COMMITTEE: DISCUSSION ITEM

CLEARING UP CONFUSION IN THE MARKETPLACE: Differences Between Asset Leases vs. Development Concessions

Alternative Project Delivery Strategies for Expansion and Renovation

Leveraging Public-Private Partnerships for Real Estate Development: Beyond Bridges and Roads

California Statewide Communities Development Authority Open PACE Program Report March 15, 2018 (Updated) 1. Introduction

Construction BIPC.com

Public-Private Partnerships. Community College Facilities Coalition

Denver Union Station: A True Public-Private Partnership

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SANTA CLARA COUNTY CIVIC CENTER PROPOSED MASTER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Revised May 2, 2016

TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS

Bill Culton, General Counsel Picerne Military Housing LLC. Dan Ferguson, Partner WeirFoulds LLP. Brad McLellan, Partner Weirfoulds LLP

Real Estate and Construction Law investing in Saudi Arabia

Course Number Course Title Course Description

Transit-Oriented Development Specialized Real Estate Services

Affordable Elegance. Highridge Costa Companies

ROLL CALL APPROVE ACTIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITY AND THE FEED TECHNOLGY CENTER, URBANA

Financing Options. Edward Bolluijt

1.0 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THE CIP VISION LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY Municipal Act Planning Act...

Financing Open Space and Watershed Acquisition in California

MOFCOM: Workshop on Trustees in the implementation of remedies in Merger Cases

CPACE Financing Overview

Summary of Pompano Pier Development Agreement Provisions for January 8, 2013 Commission Meeting

June 8, The Honorable Eric Garcetti Mayor, City of Los Angeles Room 300, City Hall 200 North Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90012

FAIRFAX COUNTY LUNCH + LEARN. Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy Financing

Housing Commission Report

REAL ESTATE TOPICS JUNE 1, 2008 NEGOTIATING AND STRUCTURING JOINT VENTURE AND LLC AGREEMENTS

Streamlining the Entitlement Process for Transit-Oriented Development

Real Estate Development and Reuse

ZAREMBA GROUP COMPANY PROFILE

Contract Law Basics and Standard Form Construction Contracts ENSC SFU. Presented by: Bob Gill, MEng, PEng, FEC

PPP Project Realization Roadmap for Public Entities. based on the PPP Act and the Act on Concessions for Construction Work or Services

Dee Wisor Denver, Colorado

RT319 Validating Advanced Work Packaging as a Best Practice A Game Changer

City deals and affordable housing

Lease Accounting and Loan Covenants: What is the Impact?

TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GROUNDS AND BUILDINGS: ACTION ITEM

Marshall S. Wolff. Partner

2016 Engineering & Construction Conference. June 15 17, 2016 The Westin Austin Downtown Austin, Texas

MODERATE INCOME RENTAL HOUSING PILOT PROGRAM: APPLICATION PROCESS, PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND AVAILABLE INCENTIVES

Public Improvement District (PID) Policy

The Ohio State University April 7, 2017 Board of Trustees

CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16, 2018 NEW BUSINESS

DISABILITY HOUSING NETWORK LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT

Multifamily Housing Development Notice of Funding Availability

Citizens Land Bank Center for Economic and Social Justice

PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA STATE HOUSING INIITATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN (LHAP) FISCAL YEARS ,

CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET & FISCAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS

will not unbalance the ratio of debt to equity.

Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing Preservation. March 1, 2018

P.O. Box. Sincerely, PHFA

PROPOSED METRO JOINT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: POLICIES AND PROCESS July 2015 ATTACHMENT B

CONTRACTING - BID LAWS

CDFA // BNY MELLON DEVELOPMENT FINANCE WEBCAST SERIES The State of P3 Financing

Welcome to the 9 th Annual Spring Housing Conference

Housing Credit Modernization Becomes Law

RIVER DANCE RV PARK ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT REPORT TOWN OF GYPSUM - SEPTEMBER RPI Consulting LLC.

LETTER OF INTENT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby mutually intend as follows:

ISC: UNRESTRICTED AC Attachment. Attainable Homes Acquisition and Development Cycle Audit

FINAL REPORT OF THE PROCUREMENT SYSTEM REVIEW METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ST. PAUL, MINNEAPOLIS

PROPOSED $100 MILLION FOR FAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Attachment 22 Railroad Agreements

A Tale of Two Hospitals, Higher Education, and Changes to Construction Delivery Models in the State of Louisiana

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

Air Rights Development Project Briefing August 6, Speakers: Tony Kinn, Director Sam Beydoun, Program Manager Jonathan Walk, Jones Lang LaSalle

State of Rhode Island. National Housing Trust Fund Allocation Plan. July 29, 2016

Land and Technology. Citizens Land Bank. P.O. Box Washington, D.C

Community Wind Project Development

Housing Reset :: Creative Advisory Accelerating Non-Profit / City Partnerships What We Heard

EX13-2. January 16, Executive Committee. RRI - Stadium Project Funding and Financing RECOMMENDATION

RFP REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. for TAX CREDIT ADVISOR SERVICES. for BOULDER HOUSING PARTNERS. March 6, 2012 Requested Return: March 15, 2010

The following is a list of assumptions on which this Term Sheet is based:

a real estate project s ultimate success is often determined by envisioning and effecting alternative uses, by generating a sense of excitement and

Is Your Operating Lease An Asset or Liability? It s Now Both

Staying Alive! How New Lease and Other Leasehold Mortgagee Protection Provisions Really Work When the Ground Lessee Defaults

POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES October 2018

A Guide to Evaluating Public Asset Privatization. A Publication of In The Public Interest

JOB DESCRIPTION MANAGEMENT EXCLUSION

PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT

First Sponsor Group Limited Investor Presentation 24 July 2015

Town of Mooresville, NC Request for Proposals Public/Private Partnership Mixed Use Development Opportunity

$3.3 $1 BILLION FUND * YEARS EXPERIENCE WHAT IS NET LEASE? BILLION *

Seattle Colleges District VI

2015 Limited Campus Master Plan Update NSHE Board of Regents Informational Update October 23, 2015

REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION RELATED CONTRACTS WITH VALUES OF LESS THAN $200,000

Organizational Project Management

Topic 4A: Developer Fee Recognition. Issue: Developer Fee Recognition for Unconsolidated Developers. Analysis/Input GAAP

Response to Communities and Local Government Committee Inquiry into capacity in the homebuilding industry

Community Based Public Private Partnership (CBP3) Great Lakes & St Lawrence Cities Initiatives

Understanding Texas TIRZ Statute Chapter 311 Texas Tax Code

HSC Regeneration Forum The Last Chapter First: Lessons Learned

[Disposition and Development Agreement - Seawall Lot 337 Associates, LLC - Mission Rock Project]

FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION Tax Credit Assistance Program Project Selection Process and Criteria

Oil & Gas Lease Auctions: An Economic Perspective

Summary of Findings & Recommendations

Multidisciplinary Research Building 1 Professional Information Session. September 18, 2015

Housing Trust Fund Developer Advisory Group. Options and Considerations Related to the HTF Operating Assistance and Operating Assistance Reserves

Transcription:

Public-Private Partnerships CBA-CLE Real Estate Spring Update March 29, 2018 Brent E. Butzin Kaplan Kirsch & Rockwell LLP bbutzin@kaplankirsch.com

Where have P3s Been Used? P3s have more commonly be used in the U.S. for transportation projects; vertical infrastructure P3s are becoming more common. Airports Great Hall Project, Denver, Colorado LaGuardia Airport P3, New York Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport, Puerto Rico Other Southport Marine Terminal, Pennsylvania Fargo-Moorhead Flood Diversion, North Dakota Roads/Highways Central 70 Project, Denver, Colorado North Tarrant Expressway, Texas Port of Miami Tunnel, Florida Rail/Transit RTD Fastracks Eagle P3, Denver, Colorado Purple Line Light Rail, Maryland LAX Automated People Mover, California Vertical/Social Infrastructure Long Beach Courthouse, California University of California, Merced, Project 2020, California Long Beach Civic Center, California National Western Center, Denver, Colorado* (coming soon)

P3 Spectrum Project Delivery Structures Project delivery approaches range from public to P3 options with varying amounts of private sector involvement In all cases, the public sponsor retains ultimate ownership of the asset(s). Public Design-Bid- Build Public CM/GC at Risk Public Design-Build P3 Design- Build- Finance P3 Design- Build-Finance- Operate- Maintain Design & Construction Public Private Private Private Private Operations & Maintenance Public Public Public Public Private Financing Public Public Public Private Private Increased risk transfer to private sector Increased cost of capital/financing Reduced public sponsor control

Design-Bid Build Designer Construction Contractor Construction Progress Payments Taxes/ Governmental Revenues Public Authority Proceeds Debt Service Public Debt Operating Costs O&M Provider

Construction Manager/General Contractor At Risk Designer Coordination Construction Manager Contractors Construction Progress Payments Taxes/ Governmental Revenues Public Authority Proceeds Debt Service Public Debt Operating Costs O&M Provider

Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain Taxes/ Governmental Revenues Design-Builder Construction Progress Payments Public Authority Availability Payment (AP) Developer / Special Purpose Vehicle Proceeds Private Debt + Equity Investors Debt Service Operating Costs O&M Provider Variations: DBFM (No Operations) Lease-Leaseback Public vs. Private Finance Public-Private Mixed Development Market Risk TOD/Value Capture

Long Beach Courthouse (2010) 545,000 square foot building 415,000 sf LA Superior Courts, 100,000 sf separate County leased space, 5,500 sf retail 1,000 space parking structure $495 million construction cost

Case Study: Long Beach Courthouse P3 Type: Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain (DBFOM) Public Sponsor: Judicial Council of California (Administrative Office of the Courts), County of Los Angeles Private Partner: Long Beach Judicial Partners (Meridiam, Clark, Johnson Controls (Facilities Manager)) Contract Structure: 35-Year Project Agreement + Ground Lease P3 Benefits/Rationale: Provided single annual price for construction and operations with ability to adjust service levels over time as per formulas Accessed innovation and creativity in design to create unique landmark Allowed public sponsor to keep focus on core judicial operations

Advantages of a P3 Model Lifecycle Cost Savings/Innovation Debt Capacity Public Sponsor Resources/Focus Bundling/Accelerated Delivery Risk Transfer Lender Considerations

Advantages of a P3 Model Lifecycle Cost Savings/ Innovation Taxes/ Governmental Revenues Design-Builder Construction Progress Payments Public Authority Availability Payment (AP) Developer / Special Purpose Vehicle Proceeds Debt Service Private Debt + Equity Investors Operating Costs O&M Provider Encourages integration of design, construction and operating firms during bid process to drive efficiencies and innovation to manage total lifecycle costs Encourages energy consumption efficiency and achievement of sustainability goals Incorporates total capital and operating costs into scoring and selection criteria instead of solely focusing on upfront capital construction budget Requires consistent annual payments from the public sponsor (e.g., availability payments) and ensures regular, preventative maintenance is performed

Advantages of a P3 Model Debt Capacity Provides for payment vis availability payments may not count directly against debt limits for public sponsors (though still incorporated into overall credit quality considerations) Public Sponsor Resources/Focus Allows public sponsors to focus internal resources on core mission (education, justice, etc.); building construction not a core activity for most public sponsors

Case Study: University of California, Merced, 2020 Project Site Plan Housing 1A Completion Fall 2018 Cost: ~$1.1 billion in construction costs across three phases with interim delivery deadlines Size: 1.2 million GSF Scope: Academic, research, administrative, residential, dining and parking facilities; UC s science and technology campus of the future

Case Study: University of California, Merced, 2020 Project P3 Type: Design-Build-Finance-Maintain (DBFM) Public Sponsor: Regents of the University of California Private Partner: Plenary Properties Merced (Plenary, Webcor, Johnson Controls) Contract Structure: 35-Year Concession P3 Benefits/Rationale: Enhance schedule certainty; delivery schedule of paramount importance for campus with students and classes Incorporate key stakeholder collaboration and input in advance of procurement Manage allocation of internal resources to focus on core mission Limit direct issuance of UC debt Bundle smaller buildings to access international expertise

Advantages of a P3 Model Bundling/Accelerated Delivery Increases project size to attract larger, more experience contractors and enhance potential for innovation and competition Reduces overall project costs by limiting redundant mobilization/debmobilization expenses across many projects Saves public sponsor personnel and financial resources by combining several procurements into one Allows for faster delivery with streamlined construction activities and point of contact

Case Study: Pennsylvania Bridge Rapid Replacement

Case Study: Pennsylvania Bridge Rapid Replacement P3 Type: Design-Build-Finance-Maintain (DBFM) Public Sponsor: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Private Partner: Plenary Walsh Keystone Partners (Plenary, Walsh) Contract Structure: 25-Year Concession Agreement P3 Benefits/Rationale: Bundled 558 bridges in a single P3 to attract large, experienced contractors and incentivize innovation Transferred long-term maintenance risk to P3 developer to drive lifecycle cost incentives into design and construction process Similar to UK small schools model

Advantages of a P3 Model Risk Transfer Transfers construction schedule risk to private developer who commits to fixed date for construction completion Provides fixed price for construction scope Provides fixed annual payments related to capital and operations; payments do not commence until construction is complete Allows for deductions to annual payments related to underperformance or unavailability of the facility; developer commits to performance standards Transfers specific risks related to site conditions, permits, etc.; certain risks retained by public sponsor

Advantages of a P3 Model Example 1: Availability Payments Commence Only Upon Construction Completion 300 200 100 0 300 200 100 0 Public Delivery Construction Payments O&M Payments P3 Delivery Construction Completion Availability Payments No availability payments until completion Milestone payments may be made during construction Manage overall cost of capital by injecting public funds to reduce private financing Incentivize completion of discrete construction elements tied to payment Tradeoff between total cost/cost certainty Project: Eagle P3 (G Line)

Advantages of a P3 Model Example 2: Long-Term Private Capital Suffers Deductions for Non-Performance 100 50 0 100 Equity Base Case Private Debt Private Equity Availability Payments Deductions Case Concession agreement includes specific events with corresponding financial deductions and noncompliance points Potential for developer default and termination if certain thresholds are met 50 Project: Eagle P3 (A Line) 0 Private Debt Private Equity Availability Payments

Lender Considerations Private lenders require step in rights to take over a project from a P3 developer and remedy construction delays in advance of the contract deadline; availability payments from the public sponsor only start when construction is complete. Public sponsor will receive liquidated damages during any period of delay beyond the scheduled completion date Performance security is available to lenders in addition to public sponsor

Choosing a Delivery Method Analysis Tool Description Key Question Economic Feasibility Benefit-cost analysis Comparison of social and economic benefits to costs of project Is the project economically attractive from the perspective of society? Financial Feasibility Financial viability analysis Evaluation of financial cash flows related to project Can the public agency afford the project? Comparing Delivery Options Value for money analysis + risk register Comparison expected P3 cash flows and expected conventional delivery method cash flows adjusted for key risks What is the optimal delivery method? or At what point is the P3 bid more attractive than conventional project delivery?

Risk Register Value Proposition: Risk should sit with party best suited to manage that risk

Value for Money Key Assumptions: Public vs. P3 Costs (Net Present Value) Construction costs Innovation Efficiencies Change orders 350 300 250 Construction schedule 200 Operating costs Predictability 150 Level maintenance investment 100 Financing costs Debt Equity 50 0 Public Sector Comparator P3 Shadow Bid Risk register/retain risks Monte Carlo Construction Costs Operating Costs Financing Costs Retained Risk

P3 Procurement Process

Best Value Evaluation It's a very sobering feeling to be up in space and realize that one's safety factor was determined by the lowest bidder on a government contract. Alan Shepard The first American to travel into space

Case Study: Long Beach Civic Center

Case Study: Long Beach Civic Center P3 Type: Mixed Public/Private Development + DBFOM Public Sponsor: City of Long Beach Private Partner: Plenary Properties Long Beach (Plenary, Clark) Contract Structure: 40-Year Concession Agreement (Public Property) + Market Risk Properties Conveyed in Fee P3 Benefits/Rationale: Transfer of real estate development risk Access to real estate expertise/value capture Guaranteed civic center cost/schedule Integrated construction scope/site planning

Case Study: Moynihan Station P3 Type: Mixed Public/Private Development Farley Building New York, NY Public Sponsor: Empire State Development Corporation Private Partner: RVS Partners (Related, Vornado and Skanska) Contract Structure: 99-Year Ground Lease + Development Agreement; State- Financed PILOT payments from Private Partner Train Hall (250,000 SF) Private Development (750,000 SF) P3 Benefits/Rationale: Guaranteed train hall cost/schedule Integrated construction scope Access to real estate expertise Use of value capture funding Tracks continue under Penn Station

Key Contract Considerations Performance Specifications Construction and operations Payment Mechanism Including deductions regime for failure to meet specifications Supervening Events Events for which time and/or schedule relief are given Unforeseen Conditions/Baselining Geotechnical, right of way availability, etc. Termination Rights/Compensation Default, convenience and force majeure cases Handback Provisions Handover of facility/asset to the public at the end of the term Dispute Resolution Procedures for resolution Change in Developer Control Limits on timing and experience of replacement parties Refinancing Public sponsor sharing in benefits Ongoing Audits/Reporting Requirements Frequency, content and inspection rights

Payment Mechanism Example Deductions for elevator unavailability: 1 elevator = $1000/day ($2000/day on City Council meeting days) 2 elevators = $3000/day ($3500/day on City Council meeting days) 3 elevators = $5000/day ($7500/day on City Council meeting days) All elevators = 75% of maximum deduction for complete unavailability of entire facility

Case Study: National Western Center

Case Study: National Western Center