The Virginian-Pilot
©
NORFOLK
Chalk up a million more bucks for light rail.
A divided City Council approved spending an additional $934,000 in taxpayer money Tuesday night to purchase a small office building on York Street that officials say would cause a safety issue when light rail opens in May.
However, some council members say Hampton Roads Transit, not the city, should be responsible for purchasing the building. The transportation agency is constructing the city's light-rail line.
"Let HRT pay for this," Councilman Andy Protogyrou said. "This is their fault. It's their mistake. I don't see why Norfolk taxpayers have to pay for this."
HRT officials say the light-rail tracks are safe and were approved by the city, state and federal agencies.
"If the City Council wants to make it safer, that's a good thing," said Tom Holden, HRT's public affairs manager.
The building, which houses a psychiatric practice and a printing company, is about a yard from light-rail tracks as they turn west from Duke Street onto York Street.
Mayor Paul Fraim said there's a blind spot where the tracks turn that could lead to pedestrians being injured or killed by light-rail trains.
"I don't know how the engineers configured the tracks here, but just to the naked eye, it's a safety issue," Fraim said. "As the train comes around the track, you cannot see it and you may not be able to hear it. I think we did the prudent thing."
Protogyrou and other council members said the blind spot was a design flaw made by consultants and engineers hired by HRT.
Light rail, expected to cost $338 million, is more than $106 million over budget. That does not include the money the council decided to spend this week with its 6-2 vote.
The issue was debated for nearly a half- hour in closed session. There was no public debate.
Councilman Paul R. Riddick, who chairs the HRT board, said he went back and forth on the issue before voting to approve the additional money. "I just decided the best thing to do is to get this done as soon as possible," he said.
Councilman Barclay C. Winn, who also serves on HRT's board, said the current management of the transit agency is not to blame.
Michael Townes was forced to resign as HRT head earlier this year primarily because of the project's cost overruns.
"There are skeletons coming out of this project because of poor management and poor engineering" under Townes, Winn said.
City Attorney Bernard A. Pishko said the building was appraised by the city at slightly less than $1 million. It is assessed for tax purposes at $755,000, City Assessor Deborah Bunn said.
Pishko said building owner Jim Baylor was seeking $600,000 in compensation for diminished value of the office building because of light-rail construction, which had previously claimed a small parking lot and two offices attached to the building.
In all, it will cost HRT and the city $1,175,000 to acquire the property.
HRT is kicking in $261,000 that will essentially pay for Baylor's claim of diminished value. The city will pay $20,000 in closing costs and $914,000 for the building.
Fraim said the building will be demolished and the site cleared before light rail begins running. He hopes it will become a park.
"The site just cries out for grass and a few trees," he said. "If you stand there on the corner, it looks like the place was built for machines instead of people. This will allow us to soften that up a bit."
Harry Minium, (757) 446-2371, harry.minium@pilotonline.com

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
ODU reports that HRT will only charge 10% for LRT fares
Dr. Koch briefed the latest "State Of The Region Report" to the members of the VBTA (Virginia Beach Taxpayers Allinace) yesterday (Sat. 11/27). In his slides he quoted HRT CEO Phil Shucet stating that HRT will only recover 10% of the operating expense for light rail from the low fares they plan to change! This means that 90% of the operating costs will be paid for by people NOT using the light rail! Such a deal! One wonders how many would support this scam if they had to actually pay what it costs to use the service? At 1.50 a ride, that means local taxpayers will pay $13.50 per ride, while those actually using the light rail pay $1.50. For every empty seat, local taxpayers will pay %15 a ride. Folks, the Tide only travels a tiny 7.4 miles! This massive tax subsidy will bleed local taxpayers dry.
Math?
OK, the math is done. If it truly costs 4 billion dollars to widen 264 then light rail isn't the fabulous deal the promoters are making it out to be. At approximately 175 million tax payers in this country the widening burden on the citizens is approximately, ummm, WOW! 25 dollars a person! I will gladly send that check! Light rail, well, we know it will be in the thousands per person but no one can really tell us the actual (realistic) amount. However, with light rail only 1-3 percent of the area total population will benefit from the ride. With the roads improved everyone benefits.
There are differences though, roads are proven to work, light rail has proven to be a bottomless money pit every where it is opened.
interstates?
The interstate and light rail are two totally different systems nor should they be compared. The citizens of Norfolk alone do not pay for the interstate construction, the entire nation does. The city of Norfolk will pay for the light rail as the Beach will if it goes with it. The interstate and other highways are needed for every day travel as well as commerce. We know what we get for road money! By the way, good roadways increase property values as well! Explore all the transportation options and not just light rail!
Well they are different
Well they are different systems but they should be compared. The cost to widen I-264 is estimated at $250,000,000 per mile, and the road between Norfolk and Virginia Beach is some 16 miles. So you do the math (hint: $4B). Plus, widening will cause condemnation and disruption to thousands of homes and businesses. In this corridor, light rail adds capacity at much lower cost (est. $500M), and since it will be on an existing ROW, with minimum disruption. And I agree with you, roads and highways do increase property value, but so does light rail cause transit oriented development. In this case though, the light rail is more cost effective with much less disruption.
Widen 264
Except that People will actually drive on I264 - they aren't going to Ride the Tide.
Condemnation and disruption
Condemnation and disruption to thousands of homes and businesses will be in full swing if this financial albatros becomes reality for VB. In addition to that, we will end up bailing out Norfolk for the $77MIL that they owe HRT for the NSU fiasco. Thanks again Mike for supporting an agenda that will disrupt homes and businesses with never-ending costs.
Penalty for piling on
I think there should be a penalty herein for piling on. It is not as if major interstate road projects have not had unanticipated costs as the project unfolded, yet when it happens with light rail, the criticism doesn't stop despite the fact the Norfolk/HRT has spent less per mile than any other system built in the United States. Those who imply that the process is out of control seem to ignore the fact that any major complex project involves changes at every stage to deal with unanticipated issues; this action by Council, in the long term, is probably best to avoid a potentially unsafe situation. The fact that TOD has already increased the tax base by some $600 M shows the benefits of the project in retaining and attracting businesses.
Piling on?
Look, the screwups on major road projects ARE criticized and are costing taxpayers a fortune. The screwups on Light rail are EPIC. Some of you plan to make money on this - the rest of us are looking at it from a more pragmatic point of view. Like it's a horrible idea and a rotten way to spend our money and is fraught with engineering mistakes. I have made a point of asking people I know and people I meet if they are going to use the Tide. None. Most laugh. We need a referendum and we need it now to stop the madness.
The cost of timidity
So because highways, bridges, and tunnels have engineering mistakes and cost overruns as well, we should not build them anymore? Of course, that is a recipe for disaster. As a region, we benefit from three major industries; that is, defense, tourism, and the port. All are dependent upon accessibility. Since we have failed to keep up, our competitors are coming after our market share, mainly, in my view, because of failed political leadership, and a failed electorate that refuses to hold their elected representatives on the state level responsible for their failure to act as stewards of our transportation infrastructure.
Not build
Who said don't continue to build? We can't keep up because our state transportion dept awards bids then thorws the bid away when the contractor whines about increased material costs or forgetting to factor in the weather delays. A bid is a bid and a contract is a contract. Once a price has been agreed upon the contractor does not get anything else. If he can't do the work for the price quoted, he is found in default and sued for non-performance. End of contract. End of money pit. After a few are held responsible for defaulting, I think bids will become more realistic and the little games played by VDOT and "their contractors" will stop. Stewardship of our tax dollars by whoever awards these contracts has been a joke.