78°
forecast

Legislation would extend light rail to Virginia Beach

Posted to: News State Government Traffic - Transportation Virginia

RICHMOND

As a train whistle sounded from someone's computer, legislation aimed at extending a light rail system now under construction in Norfolk to within blocks of the Oceanfront steamed out of a House committee on Wednesday.

But there could be trouble 'round the bend.

There's no clear plan to finance the extension or a clear idea of how much it will cost. Those glitches don't sit well with Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's administration.

Undaunted, the House Transportation Committee unanimously approved legislation that would require the state in about 90 days to begin soliciting construction bids for the project.

HB6028 is being advanced by two Virginia Beach Republicans: Del. Bob Tata and Sen. Frank Wagner. Tata told the panel that the extension has been debated for years by public officials. "It's time to move," he said.

A $232 million rail stretching 7.4 miles from downtown Norfolk to Newtown Road, called The Tide, is scheduled to begin operation in early 2010. Tata said he envisions the extension running to the Virginia Beach Convention Center.

Under his bill, the extension would be built with public and private funds. The legislation calls on the state to seek a private partner to build the extension. In theory, the company would recoup its investment and a profit by getting a cut of the rider fares.

But Charles Badger, deputy director of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation, told the committee there are too many unknowns about the project to solicit private investment.

"Right now, for the private sector to step in, they would have to update the planning and the environmental work," he said. "They'd have to take on design and engineering and get a good idea of the cost, and they would really not be in a good position to assume the risk of this project."

Tata said a significant portion of the extension could be paid for by the state's rail enhancement fund. Badger, however, said the project has not been put on any long-range state planning documents and Virginia Beach has not indicated it would be willing to match money it might receive from the rail enhancement fund, as required by law.

It is also unknown whether enlisting a private partner would jeopardize the chance of getting federal money for the extension. Tata introduced the bill without telling Virginia Beach officials. Despite their surprise, several City Council members were encouraged by the legislation.

"When you have folks on the state level who are looking out for local government, it's great," City Councilman John Uhrin said. "If somebody's going to give you a gift, whether you ask for it or not, it's still a gift."

Virginia Beach City Council members have reopened discussions about light rail in the past year. The council is trying to acquire the Norfolk-Southern right of way, but council members haven't voted on whether Virginia Beach would use the land for light rail or another form of transportation.

The city's master plan for the Oceanfront envisions light rail coming to the Convention Center. Uhrin and Councilman Jim Wood, who both serve on the Hampton Roads Transit board, have also discussed holding town hall meetings to gauge community interest in light rail.

Those meetings are likely to be held in late summer or early fall, Uhrin said.

Although voters rejected a light rail plan in 1999, sentiment seems to be shifting, Wood said.

"I am hearing resoundingly positive feedback from citizens because of the high gas prices," Wood said.

In order for light rail to extend into Virginia Beach, Norfolk would have to be willing to build spurs to Norfolk Naval Station and Old Dominion University, Wood said.

"For light rail to work for Virginia Beach, it has to take Virginia Beach citizens to destinations they desire."

Warren Fiske, (804) 697-1565, warren.fiske@pilotonline.com

Deirdre Fernandes, (757) 222-5121, deirdre.fernandes@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

To Mr. hammondjd

Subsidies by taxpayers to free enterprise is the topic of my discussion. Subsidies to the light rail system will be massive. Even back when the private firms GM, Firestone, and Standard Oil of California, between 1936 and 1950, bought out more than 100 electric surface-traction systems in 45 cities to be dismantled and replaced with GM buses, massive government funds were necessary to build the road system to replace the trolleys with the cars, trucks and buses. The trolley system, the moribund system of private enterprise that had collapsed in the 1930s was dismantled. The federal government provided huge subsidies of taxpayers funds to shift the nation to complete motorization. This decision was made by the government, business and the public who wanted the freedom that motorization afforded. Today most of our goods are delivered by truck and most of our personal commuting is by automobile. The public has voted Not to the high subsidies for light rail. To revert back to "trolleys" is foolish and will cost the taxpayer Millions of dollars in subsidies.

To Mr. McMullen

The rail systems in use everywhere else in the world and that existed here United States for generations were bought up by companies such as General Motors and Standard Oil and driven to the ground on purpose. Then after they abandoned the streetcars and tore them apart, everyone was dependent on their product. It's not "the market" and it's not a conspiracy, it's basic history. You can look it up: http://www.google.com/search?q=national+city+lines&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Virginia Beach light rail history

Virginia Beach as a town/city began as the for-profit investment plan of aNorfolk developer named Colonel Marshall Parks. He realized that in order to profit from the land in what is now the VA Beach "oceanfront resort area" (The 1880 Seaside Hotel & land Company) He needed to develop a way for tourists to get there. What did he do? He used his own money to create the Norfolk and Virignia Beach Beach Railroad & Improvement Company. He paid to build and operate light rail along the very same rail line used by Norfolk's "Tide" and for the extention under study. He then created more light rail elsewhere. It took 3 years.

No taxpayer subsidy, just his own money. He reaped the profits from the increase in the value of the land he purchased.

Wood is right

Wood is right - most people from Virginia Beach aren't going to downtown Norfolk. They should have done it right the first time and built light rail down the median of I-64 to the Naval Base instead of the perpetually underused HOV lanes we have now.

Let's use our imaginations!!

Sometime in the next few decades, Is it impossible? For a real oil crisis to occur, or possibly just an oil embargo, another hurricane in the gulf? Are these crazy thoughts, who ever would have predicted The Great Depression? Something may happen in the next century that would require people to commute without gas. Maybe we'll have electric cars or hydrogen...or maybe not. Think!

The Constitution

Exactly what part of the State or US Constitution covers the governments role to do the things you mention. Your desires that you mention always increases the debt for the taxpayer in order to increase the profits for the developer. The free enterprise system is exactly that- free enterprise. If a developer feels that a project is worthwhile, then he should invest in it and take his chances to earn a profit. The government must neither hinder nor enhance this uniquely American system of free enterprise. To do so creates a socialist type system where the government controls development, not the developer or the citizen. I do not understand why the government feels correct in interfering where it has no Constitutional right to do so. I wish you all the luck in the world with your developments, just don't look to the taxpayer or the government to create or enhance the opportunities. You need to

Oh, so you are saying roads

Oh, so you are saying roads are self supporting? Transit oriented development can be as follows: Transportation projects, for example, can increase adjacent land values, and thus generate a windfall for private landowners. Public agencies can with proper preparation and foresight capture a portion of that windfall with any of the following methods: 1) local improvement districts; 2) public-private development of adjacent land; 3) traffic impact fees; 4) tax increment financing districts; or 5) buying privately held land near transportation hubs that is zoned for low-density use on the open market, increasing the designated use density, then selling the land back to private developers on the open market, capturing the capital gain resulting from both the increase in designated use density and the presence of the transportation hub. As a private developer in Hampton Roads, I

Light Rail Trolley Systems Were Discontinued in Past

Light rail is costing 232M dollars in Norfolk for 7.4 miles of track plus the terminals, overpasses and infrastructure improvements. the line to the VB Convention Center will cost more. The system will run at a loss and will have to be subsidized to the tune of millions of dollars for the sake of a few who cannot afford to or wish not to drive. The taxes in the Hampton Roads region are stifling now - imagine if we get light rail expenditures to subsidize also. Many more people will be on the verge of financial collapse as the job market is not keeping pace with the cost of living. Jobs being created are low paying service and seasonal compared to the jobs being lost. Mass transit is a product of a charitable and giving government who wishes to collect tax money to give to or subsidize the less fortunate. This is not the governments function. The Constitution is not inclusive of Charity. The redistribu

Or you could look at St Louis, Charlotte and Atlanta

Quote: "I have no doubt that the increase in real estate value of the property around light rail will escalate greatly in value and private owners invest billions to create higher value, multi use projects. Is this simply speculation? No. One only has to look at similar projects in Baltimore, San Jose, Portland, Kansas City, and many other cities..."

Do your research Mike. No one wants to live next to a RR track with trains passing at all hours. Residential real estate values plummeted in St Louis and Charlotte along the route and residents are none to happy with that or the noise and congestion. Both projects were grossly over budget. Charlotte by over 100%. Both projects were late and St Louis was plagued with lawsuits. Don't start with the tired crap about all projects being grossly over budget. Highway const avg is 10% over.

Look at the route of Marta. Not past nice residences due to noise,

twomiler

I agree such attitudes did, and do exist. However, your brush is to wide. The majority of the residents of what is now VB settled here because of the military. Most people have no ties to the area to link them to the formation of the new cities.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: News rss feed    State Government rss feed    Traffic - Transportation rss feed   


Toolbox


Partners