Light Rail Transportation

VDOT has $5 million extra?

VDOT has $5 million to spend on yet another study? If they had spent half as much on roads as on studies, we might have a world class transportation network here in Hampton Roads. As a region, we need to focus on building a well-planned “third crossing.” Expanding the HRBT will absolutely reduce congestion on that route. The Third Crossing, however, will reduce congestion and add options for a variety of routes. It will allow direct highway access for all of the Port of Virginia’s Southside facilities. Why is this important? It is important because truck traffic will not have to use Hampton Blvd, the HRBT, or any other artery in Hampton Roads. These truck bound for the western part of the state and beyond will be able to be on their way without impacting our major roadways. In the current age of tight budgets and no money for expanding highways, we, as a region, need to make our dollars count. The current Third Crossing plan already is fairly well thought out. It includes a link from Norfolk (near NIT) to I664. It includes a parallel crossing next to I664′s MMBT. It also includes a widening of I664 and a connection to the Western freeway. When coupled with the proposed connector for the MLK Freeway in Portsmouth, The Third Crossing would allow Downtown Portsmouth to have a near direct connection to the Peninsula, possibly boosting Portsmouth’s overall economy. The Third Crossing plan also includes a plan to make it multi-modal, meaning that it could accommodate a light rail line to the Peninsula and/or a freight line out to the west. The light rail line could vastly enhance the economic appeal of Downtown Newport News, spurring investment. A freight line would enhance the appeal of all of Hampton Roads’ ports, meaning increased port traffic without increased road traffic.

View

Hampton Roads Third Crossing in a larger map

The biggest question here should not be which road to widen, but how to fund the Third Crossing.  The estimated cost of the Third Crossing is nearly $6 billion (adjusted for inflation since 1997). That is obviously not going to be funded by Hampton Roads alone. $6 billion is approximately the same as the all of the Seven Cities’ budgets combined. This is the part where we need to get creative. The only way to get this built is to explore a combination of funding streams. Here is my plan:

First, we need to identify all stakeholders and get contributions. For example, the military will benefit from a Third Crossing, so they should chip in around half a billion dollars. The ports will benefit enormously, so the VA Port Authority should chip in around a billion dollars. The state should definitely chip in close to a billion dollars. The federal government is going to have to supply most of the money, perhaps 2.5 or three billion. The rest is going to have to be made up for with tolls. Of course, a Public-Private partnership could be reached that would allow the state, federal, and port subsidies to be reduced (but not eliminated). A one- or two-cent region-wide sales tax could also help reduce the subsidy from the state.

I know everyone hates tolls and taxes. I do to. However, nothing is free. Like I said, the cost of this project is the total of the budgets for all of the Seven cities. If we rely solely on the state or federal government, it will never get built. As for the HRBT, why waste $2-3 billion to build something that we may not need if we build the Third Crossing

VA Requiring Light Rail for VB?

According to a VP article today, the Virginia Department of Transportation may require Virginia Beach to use the Norfolk Southern corridor for light rail in exchange for the $20 million dollar contribution for its purchase. This should not be new. That was the stated purpose when the state approved the grant to assist in the extension of the Norfolk light rail line. Its also a great way for our State officials, who apparently can be leaders, to do what is necessary for the progress of the City of Virginia Beach and for Virginia. They have done what Virginia Beach’s leaders have been unable to do. Besides, why are VB residents surprised that state money comes with strings? Nearly all the money that we as cities receive from state and federal sources have strings attached. I can only hope, though, that the state sticks to its requirement and doesn’t back off.

Downtown’s Multi-Modal Transportation Center

Multi-Modal Transportation Center Full Build Out Concept and Development Sites along Connecting Routes

Norfolk is moving forward with planning and financing a new multi-modal transportation center Downtown. Excellent idea. The plan is to have it ready to open once Amtrak rolls in in three years. It is very exciting. Combining the news of Virginia Beach’s move toward urbanism and I get the idea that our area is actually maturing as a metropolitan area. The one thing that scared me for a minute, though, was where it said,

“In addition, a new bus transfer facility would be developed, moving about two-thirds of buses from the current location at Cedar Grove north of downtown on Monticello Avenue.”

I was worried that might mean that Norfolk was going to keep 1/3 of the buses at Cedar Grove. Fear not. According to the full report by the City,

At present, 17 routes on the HRT network serve the Cedar Grove site, and be-tween 6,000 – 7,000 passengers board or alight daily at the facility. The general conditions of the Cedar Grove site combined with its lack of amenities, poor pedestrian link-ages and connections, and also its remoteness from downtown activity centers combine to make the restructuring of the primary bus transfer operation in Norfolk a high priority. Its lack of a direct connection to the light rail corridor is also another detriment of the current site. … It is planned that the new bus transfer operation at the Multi-Modal Transportation Center will serve 9 current HRT bus routes operating to the Downtown Norfolk area generally from areas to the south and east. Concurrent to this restructuring of the transit network, 6 other bus routes to the downtown area from the west and north would also be realigned to serve other light rail stations which will help to further deemphasize and limit congestion at the Cedar Grove site and thereby improving passenger service and convenience across the entire bus transit network.

That mean 15 out of 17 buses will no longer serve Cedar Grove. I hope the other two will only serve it by driving by. Thinking about it, this actually shows some intelligence on the part of Norfolk city officials. They publicly recognize that Cedar Grove  is a terrible place for a bus transfer point. Ignoring the fact that the city is solely responsible for Cedar Grove, I have to give someone credit on this one. One problem. In the build-out image above, the nice, new bus transfer location has been built over with a parking garage. Check it out yourself:

Where did our bus transfer point go?

Light Rail vs. Cars … Again

Sunday’s Virginian Pilot had 2 definitively anti-light rail letters to the editor. The first, entitled “Hard Questions on Light Rail,” assumes that light rail is meant to replace the vehicles currently used by commuters actually commuting. The author, Arthur S. Poole, then goes on to suggest that the tax-subsidized nature of light rail means that, even with a complete system, the transit mode is not worth the time, money, or effort. He claims that the outcome of the light rail expansion study is ‘preordained,’ meaning that no matter what, the study will claim positive net effects. Mr. Poole claims that this is similar to the studies that came before projects such as ” Nauticus, the soccer stadium, the TPC golf course, and Waterside,” insinuating that the positive effects never came to fruition. While I have nothing against Mr. Poole personally, I would like to point out a few flaws in his argument.

I will start at the end and work back. While the soccer stadium and the TPC course might not have brought their positive effects to fruition for Virginia Beach, Norfolk’s Nauticus and Waterside have, overall, been successful. Over the past two years, for example, did you know that according to the city, Nauticus has operated at a slight profit. Its certainly not a windfall but black ink is black ink. The more important effects of Nauticus include the 300,000+ visitors it receives annually. Those people do not fall out of the sky, visit Nauticus, and the get sucked back to some heavenly origins. They spend time Downtown. They pay for parking. They purchase meals at Downtown eateries. The patronize MacArthur Center. Even if  they only spend one day Downtown, they certainly spend more than the $12 admission fee. Now for Waterside. It is true that Waterside is currently a drain on the city. It is true that the city is spending a fortune to keep it operational right now. It is also true, however, that the construction of Waterside was a monumental achievement for the City of Norfolk and it can successfully be argued that without Waterside, Downtown would not be what it is today. I will agree that it needs major renovations for a turn-around. It was not, however, a failure in any sense of the word.

Next, lets look at the subsidies. Yes, public transit in the United States, in general, depends on public subsidies to operate. But wait. Does the entire highway system not depend on the same heavy subsidies? Yes, you pay a gas tax. But does anyone really believe that this tax single-handedly pays for our roads? Of course not. Millions more are tagged for road-related projects from city, state, and federal budgets. Currently, the Tide will cost $45.7 million per mile. Some notable highway projects: Southeastern Parkway – $100 – 121 million/mile, 3rd Crossing – $131 million/mile. Our fuel tax in Virginia is $0.175/gallon. Even if you only got 10 MGP, you would only pay $0.35 for each trip on a road such as the Southeastern Parkway. Each transit trip in Hampton Roads costs $1.50 per passenger. Seems to me that the transit riders pay more out of pocket than the car drivers.

Finally, the part about replacing cars. Light rail (or any new transit system, for that matter), is not created to take current cars off the road. They are built to take future cars off the road. Nobody in Hampton Roads would argue that are population is never going to increase from what it is now. The goal of having a usable mass transit system such as light rail is to guide the construction of high-density, urban centers. The residents of these centers would be the most likely riders of fixed-guideway transit like light rail. 10,000 Downtown employees could move to Town Center. Without light rail, they would all take I-264. 10,000 more cars. With light rail, however, they would not increase traffic for those who live to far away to use light rail. The second letter to the editor (“Rail Stop,” by Dick Jones) fits this place as well .

In this age of huge deficits and debt, the government (both state and federal) cannot afford to continue pouring money into a wasteful roadway system. A road is not free once it is built. It takes continuous maintenance. A road without maintenance will turn into a gravel road. I am sure that you have heard the argument for using transit money to buy the people that use transit their very own cars. This would be great if we had a place to put them. HRT averaged 50,857 passengers per weekday in May 2010. Can you imagine if Hampton Roads suddenly had 50,000 more cars on our roads. The increased load would also wear our roads out faster. If this method were followed nationwide, the hundred of millions of additional cars would choke highways and increase demand for fuel (even hybrids use fuel), leading to higher prices. More cars also means more accidents which means higher insurance for everyone.

What I want everyone to get out of this is that  the visible day-to-day cost may look higher for transit, but that is only because you can actually quantify the cost. The cost to support individual car commutes is much higher. Even if you do not ride or plan to ride transit, don’t complain about or try to destroy those that do. As time progresses, fuel will only get more expensive. Land will get more expensive. Public transportation, like it or not, is the future.

No Light Rail Referendum… so far

The Virginian-Pilot reported the other day that Wally Erb, the man behind the the most recent drive for a light rail referendum, was able to gather only 1,083 signatures. Unfortunately for Mr. Erb, he needed 25,000 signatures.  25,000 signatures represent less than six percent of Virginia Beach’s population. 1,083 signatures represent less than .25% of the city’s total population. Sound like a mandate to me. If the city polled residents on any other project and only got support from a quarter of a percent of the population, there would be an outcry if they went through with the project. As I have said in the past, Virginia Beach does not need a referendum. A city elects leaders to lead. If they do not lead or lead in the wrong direction, they get voted out. In the last election, the voters elected light rail supporters. It should not be a surprise that they now want to support light rail.

Despite the negative comments on PilotOnline, light rail will be a benefit to Virginia Beach. However, it will not reduce the number of cars currently on the road. That is not the point of the light rail. The congestion reduction aspect comes into play when Virginia Beach’s “Strategic Growth Areas” begin to expand. Six of VB’s eight SGAs center around the proposed light rail stops. The most important one so far is the Pembroke SGA, which includes Town Center. The residents of Town Center did not move there because they wanted to continue a highway-oriented, suburbanite lifestyle. They moved there for the urban feel. With light rail, that urban feel will grow around each station. Urban residents don’t mind public transit. That is why they are urban residents. Even reformed suburbanites re-evaluate their position on public transit once it becomes convenient for them. People, regardless of where they live, chose what their mode of transportation based on what is cheapest and most convenient. In a mostly suburban area like HR, cars fit this description. While public transportation is definitely cheaper than car use, the convenience of the car far out weighs the cost-effectiveness of the transit. As transit in HR gets more reliable, efficient, and convenient, ridership will increase.