Posts tagged Hampton Roads Transit

HRT: Increase Fare or Efficiency

I, more than anyone, want HRT to be as efficient as possible. However, when I read the news that HRT’s temporary President and CEO, Philip Schucet, wanted to postpone raising the fare so that he could hire a consultant to look for savings, I was concerned. A consultant will probably cost HRT between $100,000 and $250,000. Basically, their job will be to collect loose change at HRT to pay their own consultant fee. Additionally, the VP states:

The consultant will consider a range of adjustments, including increasing bus frequencies on popular routes to encourage more ridership and reducing frequencies on less popular routes to save money.

HRT doesn’t need a consultant for this. Any frequent rider would tell you that if you increased frequency, ridership would increase. Lengthening the operating hours would do that as well. Regarding saving money by cutting low-performing routes, HRT cannot enact these changes. Each city would have to cut its own service. Route 18 in Norfolk has terrible ridership. HRT is aware. The City is aware. Unfortunately, the City of Norfolk will not kill the route for fear that the few riders that do utilize it will revolt.

Attention HRT: I will give you advice for free. Increase frequency at peak hours of high-ridership routes such as the #2, #3, #20, etc. On low performing routes such as the #18, modify the route to go places that people actually would want to go. For example, the #18 could continue down Cromwell, make a right on Tidewater, a right on Norview, and continue to the Airport. The southern end of the route would loop  and end in Grandy Village and Chesterfield Heights. This way the route would work as a feeder to light rail and serve Norfolk International Airport, with appears to be the only major airport without transit service. Ridership would also increase due to service to a number of apartment/condo communities and to multiple shopping centers. Routes like the new #14 could increase ridership by lengthening the route to accommodate development that has occurred since the route was originally developed. In order to fund expanded service, however, HRT will need more money. That money will probably not come from the cities, the state, or the federal government. They don’t have any extra money. That leaves a fare increase.

According to the VP, only 20% of HRT’s budget is covered by the current fare as opposed to the 40% covered at comparable transit agencies. That means HRT needs to raise over $14 million in fares to reach 40%.  HRT is diverting federal maintenance money toward operations. If this is continued, HRT’s infrastructure (buildings, buses, etc.) will deteriorate. There is no way a consultant will find $14 million in savings. I am not saying that a fare increase would solve all of HRT’s problems, but it would be a start. Unfortunately, a fare increase takes time to get approval. I am afraid that by the time this consultant is finished, the time will have passed where a 50 cent increase will no longer cover an expansion in services.

I think HRT should move forward with the fare increase immediately. I think that the HRT staff really do know what they are doing. If each member city would actually consider some of HRT’s suggestions, HRT could make positive changes without paying a consultant to suggest old ideas.

Tide’s Final Cost = $338,284,251

Tide LRT Vehicles Being Delivered

HRT has released their final “cost-to-completion” for the Tide light rail system currently under construction in Norfolk. The new final cost is $338,284,251. This is, of course, much higher than the $232 million that was originally promised. Despite claims that HRT’s new President and CEO Philip Shucet is responsible for the firming up of the new number, the consultant was actually hired for the job by Townes, who knew about the cost overruns but failed to live up to City Council’s standards. It actually would make sense to me that the numbers Townes was feeding council were the preliminary numbers from his consultant. The difference between Townes’s and Shucet’s communication is that Townes should have done what Shucet did: tell council to hold on for a couple weeks while the consultant finishes the estimate.

Regardless, I hope that the project can stick to these numbers until completion. Personally, if Shucet does a good job with costs, I think we should demote him to a position to simply control LRT construction. That way we can hire a President and CEO that actually knows how to operate a transit system.

http://www.ridethetide.com/about_the_tide/cost-to-complete.shtml

HRT to Ask VB for Money

Th Pilot reported that the new temporary leader for Hampton Roads Transit, Philip Shucet, will ask Virginia Beach to share 20% of the VB Light Rail Extension Study’s cost. Coming in at approximately $245,000, it is the latest in a long series of problems, real or perceived, at HRT. The money is to cover the 20% match required to receive a $1.2 million grant that HRT received from a federal source. Virginia Beach councilwoman Rosemary Wilson told the Pilot, “”It was always funded by HRT, we weren’t paying for it.” … I’m not sure that the councilwoman knows how HRT operates. It doesn’t have its own money. All of its money comes from grants from the federal, state, and local governments. Virginia Beach, however indirectly, has contributed money toward the study. I do understand that they were apparently told by former President Townes that all cost had been covered. Regardless, that is not my problem. My problem is that there was a cost estimate of $4.3 million that has risen to $6.6 million for a consultant contract. HRT’s Senior VP of Development told the Virginian Pilot that the price was just for the contract and did not include other costs. What other costs could not be included in a consultant’s contract? You hire a consultant to examine a possible extension of light rail into Virginia Beach. The price should include all costs of completing that mission. If the board made former President Townes leave, why can we not get rid of other executives that would even sign a contract that in not all-inclusive. I don’t even get work done on my car without a quote. If something new is discovered during the course of the service, they call and we discuss it. But studying a light rail extension is not the same as doing work on a car. These consultants were hired (hopefully) because they have experience in studying proposed transit systems. Perhaps they know that HRT seems to sign-then-read when they sign contracts. Regardless, a contract should include all costs to complete the task. Then, the consultant needs to be held to the price. No exceptions unless there is an actual emergency.

HRT Names Interim CEO

HRT has named Philip A. Shucet as the new interim CEO for the company. Financially, I think that this is a great move. Due to his record on cost-control, he should bring some much needed eyes on the various budgets of HRT. One minor thing that I have to wonder about is: The Virginian-Pilot reported that “when Shucet took over VDOT in 2002, one in every five construction projects was behind schedule, and more than half were over budget. By the end of his three-year tenure, 75 percent of projects were on time and 80 percent were on budget.” Now basic math tell us that, as for the budget part, he improved. He raised the “on budget” rate from less than 50% to around 80%. Unfortunately, basic math also tells us that, when it comes to on-time performance, he lost ground. “One in five” is 20%. That means, following various properties you thought you’d never use, 80% were on time. When he left, however, only 75% were on time. Not a large number, but large enough the Pilot decided it needed a better spin.

The part that I really worry about is whether his budgetary sense is going to have a positive or negative effect on ridership and ease of use. This man has very little in his published background that suggests that he knows anything about running a public transit company. I am not saying that this is a bad thing. Given the fact that most transit companies are poorly run, it might be time for someone who is different. I just think that we need to keep a watchful eye on what he thinks are cuts waiting to be made.

Light Rail Oops

Apparently someone made a mistake. The Virginian-Pilot is reporting that a section of the embedded light rail tracks must be reconstructed due to a failure during a routine inspection. The problem only applies to the concrete surrounding the tracks and in no way requires the rebuilding of the tracks themselves. While this is unfortunate, it give us a couple of things to think about. First, it shows us that the line is being inspected properly. Not that the concrete plays much of a role in the light rail itself (the tracks are built as regular railroad tracks, them surrounded by concrete), but you would not want the concrete breaking up from traffic. The second thing to keep in mind is that HRT is not responsible. Instead, the contractor must cover the cost of the repairs, as it is their mistake.

Workers remove concrete after it failed a compression test.

If only they would have thought about this earlier. Other situations such as the extra pilings they found early last year, should have been dealt with the same way. If you pay a consultant to count the pilings, you expect a thorough job. I could have gone down and counted from shore for the thousands that were paid out. I would have done it for half. I don’t have to say that I am definitely a proponent for light rail in HR, but come on. Hold contract holders responsible all of the time.


View

Concrete Removal in a larger map