Harry Minium
The Virginian-Pilot
©
NORFOLK
Norfolk's light-rail project, now under construction, will cost $55.9 million more than expected.
About $22.8 million of that will be paid by the city, with the balance coming from the state.
A year ago, when the 7.4-mile line received a green light from federal authorities, the budget was $232.1 million. The City Council will learn today that the price has jumped 24 percent to $288 million.
Hampton Roads Transit and city officials attribute the overruns to construction and real estate cost increases, safety and security features required by the state, changes demanded by Norfolk State University, and enhancements such as station upgrades and landscaping added by the city.
The Virginian-Pilot obtained financial documents and copies of e-mails last week under the Freedom of Information Act that revealed the cost overruns.
Councilman W. Randy Wright, an HRT board member who spearheaded the project on council, said the project early on was "mismanaged."
"There were a bunch of mistakes... human error from not having the experience," Wright said. "We didn't have as tight a management reins on it as we could have."
HRT has corrected course by hiring managers with light-rail experience, Wright said.
Michael Townes, HRT president and CEO, challenged Wright's assessment.
He said he did not start hiring rail experts until after the project was federally funded so he would not risk spending regional transit money on a Norfolk project that may not have materialized.
The project won federal approval in the fall of 2007 and construction began in early 2008. Much of the new light-rail management team was put in place mid year. "We have managed construction while building a very superior staff," Townes added.
HRT is managing the construction and will operate the trains. Light rail was projected to carry passengers in early 2010, but Townes said the opening date has been pushed to summer or early fall of 2010.
The train will run from the medical complex on Brambleton Avenue through downtown past Norfolk State University to the Virginia Beach border at Newtown Road. It's being paid for by federal, state and city governments.
Because of an infusion of cash from the state, city taxpayers will pay less than half of the cost overruns, the council will be told. The city had originally committed $33 million toward the project and recently added $2.1 million. An additional $20.7 million will be added to that.
The state initially committed $34 million to the project and recently added another $12.4 million. It now will ante up another $20.7 million to help cover the overruns.
Transportation Secretary Pierce Homer said the state made Norfolk light rail a priority and therefore will allocate additional money from its six-year capital fund.
"When you choose priorities, you make them work and other things have to wait in line," Homer said.
Wright said there may be an influx of federal money, which is already paying $167.2 million. He would not elaborate.
The overruns are less than some council members anticipated.
"I'm not happy, but that number is manageable," Councilman Barclay C. Winn said.
"I actually thought it was going to be more," Vice Mayor Anthony L. Burfoot said, adding that he wants to "peel back the numbers" to see if costs can be reduced.
Today's presentation to the council has been delayed for months as officials tried to get a handle on costs and funding.
E-mails turned over to The Pilot by the city indicate frustration between city and HRT officials over the project.
In late September, after a light-rail briefing to the City Council was postponed because of incomplete information, Stanley A. Stein, assistant city manager, voiced frustration in an e-mail to three HRT officials.
"You said you had more and that is what I need please," he said of budget figures provided by HRT. "City management can not put forth numbers that we can not explain and which may not be supportable or agreed upon."
In October, Stein was more direct in an e-mail to City Manager Regina V.K. Williams about a safety enhancements recommended by a state safety review staff. "T he review staff tells our staff that HRT did not speak accurately to us concerning these and many other needs," Stein wrote.
Later, regarding street lighting for the project downtown, Stein wrote of HRT officials: "They appear to be burying their heads on this one."
Wright said a problem with the project from the start was that almost nobody believed light rail would be approved by the federal government, so the city did not begin to fully flesh out the budget numbers until after it was approved.
There were years of study and delays before the project won federal approval and money. Over time, the budget had been slashed from $360 million to meet stringent federal funding criteria.
"We had to go in with a bare-bones budget to get federal funding," Wright said.
"Then reality set in," he said. "Light rail is going to be around for generations after we are gone. We have one chance to do it right."
Wright said most other cities, including Charlotte, N.C., are paying more for light rail. Charlotte's, which opened a year ago, paid just more than $50 million per mile while Norfolk will pay about $40 million, he said.
"We did projections, and by that, I mean HRT and the city," Williams said. "They were our best estimate at the time. The actual numbers have turned out to be different. But I believe the upgrades and conscious decisions we have made to improve the project account for most" of the cost overruns.
Pilot news researcher Jakon Hays contributed to this report.
Debbie Messina, (757) 446-2588, debbie.messina@pilotonline.com
Harry Minium, (757) 446-2371, harry.minium@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Hey Steven
Here's what the voters in St. Louis did.
From MyFox in St. Louis: "The agency that provides mass transit in the St. Louis area plans massive service cuts and will eliminate 600 jobs, or 25 percent of its work force.
The announcement on Friday was not unexpected after voters in November turned down a tax increase to provide more money for Metro, the agency that provides light rail, bus and other transportation services in the region.
Metro's board approved cuts that will significantly reduce bus, light rail and Call-A-Ride service, effective March 30. Meanwhile, workers ranging from bus and train operators to mechanics and administrative employees will lose their jobs."
600 hundred more people out of work and cuts across the board.
You said Steven
"They just soundly defeated by public vote funding the extensions." It's the next to last statement in your post. Now perhaps people in St. Louis prefer to believe that's what was rejected by the voters, since that's easier to swallow that than say cutting service for the handicapped. But like it or not, that's what the voters did.
Yes, the extensions were part of the package. But they also voted against handicapped transportation and increased bus service. They voted with their pocketbooks in mind and nothing more. They did that, instead of supporting increased transportation in several forms, and have now forced fare increases and decreased service in all forms.
And that disaster now moves almost 70,000 people each weekday.
Hey AL
Please point out in my post where I said that the voters voted to "turn down extensions or stated that wording was on the ballot as you claim in your quote. "The voters did not vote and turn down extensions of the Metro rail system. That question was not on the ballot."
I said they soundly defeated funding for the extensions and that most certainly is an undisputable fact. What the funding was for was very, very, well known and debated in the St. Louis area. From light rail propoganda site: "St. Louis — Ongoing funding and extensions to MetroLink light rail and transit system, new sales tax funding — Failed
Proposition M lost, with 52% of voters opposing and 48% supporting the measure."
The St. Louis light rail has been an absolute taxpayer disaster.
Vote was based on money, not light rail
No Steven, that's not really true. The voters did not vote and turn down extensions of the Metro rail system. That question was not on the ballot. They were not asked if they wanted to see the system expanded.
Voters defeated an 1/2 cent increase in taxes that would have helped to fund all Metro operations, both light rail, bus, and para-transit. They voted on money only, not on the light rail system. And so now all forms of public transportation within the St. Louis area are in trouble and facing fare increases.
Finally it's important to note that it wasn't "soundly defeated" either. More than 48% of the voters did say yes, and voted for the increased tax. Had 75% of the voters said no, that would have been a sound defeat.
Not so fast misimmons
""imjustsaying" thank you for your biased 4 year old link. Yes the link you provided is from 2004, why then if St. Louis's MetroLink is so bad, did they build an extention in 2006 and why do they have plans for 6 new extentions."
That study is hardly biased. It was performed by a financial group that would have benefited if light rail did all that was claimed. If light rail actually "worked" it would be good for them.
Don't get too awful giddy about the St. Louis fiasco either. The thing was late, grossly over budget, plagued by lawsuits, scandals, firing of the top officials etc. My family lives in St. Louis. The residents hate the thing. They just soundly defeated by public vote funding the extensions. It's dead.
All wrong
This is not the time to yoke business owners with the expense of more bureaucratic pork. I've seen shops closing all around town. Here's an idea - let NSU pay for the improvements they demand, let the state pay for the features they demand, let HRT figure out a way to pay for some of their own 'mismanagement', let the city find some cuts elsewhere to pay for pretty shrubs and flowers, and for the increased real estate costs (someone's property is increasing in value?) why not simply reassess the land value for the property near the rail system and thus collect higher taxes on those benefiting from the project? Surely the value of that property will go up with all the bacon rolling along those rails?
well
Actually Orion, the first tracks have been laid, www.ridethetide.com
just so you know.
LRT won't work here, but to the anti-LRT posters...
I see the same posters like the Tabor DDS and aalto posting the same ol' stuff about LRT being a waste, which it is. BTW, you want to see real boondoggles...look at the numbers for NJ Transit's Hudson Bergen LR and RiverLINE LR. Cost overrun city, but since NJ is highly pro transit, nobody blinked an eye except a small minority on the Jersey coast.
If you whiners really know this is wasting money, then you'd be out there torching construction equipment and putting flyers on cars urging people that Norfolk sucks, and to not go there. I know most of the folks on this section live in VB, and LRT is coming to VB, you can take that to the bank. (Sessoms, bank, get it?...hahaha) But instead, you post your meaningless comments on this comments section, which changes nothing out in reality. Just sit back and watch the fall of Rome, thats all you can do.
Sorry Doc
Sorry Doc, but that’s not true. First off, mass transit received $8.5 Billion in funding, so the $8B is not a fraction of what was stolen by mass transit. And mass transit includes buses too, not just trains. Additionally, mass transit actually pays a higher fuel tax than you do. Amtrak, commuter RR’s that use diesel fuel, and buses all pay 24.4 cents tax/gallon, we pay 18.4 cents.
As for the future, in 2005 Congress passed the Highway bill at $284B a total that was $91B less than the DOT estimated it needs to maintain safe highways and is $28B more than was projected to be collected via gas taxes. Those projections are now coming in lower than expected. It’s expected that $9B will be needed in both 2009 & 2010, $12B after that.
Cost of Norfolk's light rail project increases 24 percent
Really?! Noooooooooo...
Just think, not one new rail of track has been laid and there has been how many cost increases?
What is it they say about a fool and his money?