News & Reviews News Wire Las Vegas opts for bus rapid transit over light rail NEWSWIRE

Las Vegas opts for bus rapid transit over light rail NEWSWIRE

By Angela Cotey | April 12, 2019

| Last updated on November 3, 2020

Get a weekly roundup of the industry news you need.

Email Newsletter

Get the newest photos, videos, stories, and more from Trains.com brands. Sign-up for email today!

Las_Vegas_Logo

LAS VEGAS, Nev. — Las Vegas’ transit agency has opted for bus rapid transit over light rail for an upcoming project.

The Southern Nevada Regional Transportation Commission board voted unanimously on Thursday for a dedicated-lane bus transit system for its Maryland Parkway corridor project, choosing the bus option over a light rail proposal and an upgrade of the existing conventional bus service.

The 8.7-mile corridor will start near the Las Vegas airport and run through downtown to the Las Vegas Medical District. [See “Las Vegas commission to consider light rail plan,” Trains News Wire, April 11, 2019.]

The Las Vegas Sun reports that cost was the biggest factor in the decision. The bus rapid transit corridor is estimated to cost $335 to build and $7.2 million in annual operating and maintenance, while light rail would have capital costs of $750 million and $11.5 million for annual operations. An upgrade of the existing Route 109 bus service would have cost just $29 million, with $6.8 million in annual costs, but also would have produced the smallest increase in ridership, according to a study by the commission.

Engineering for the project will begin in 2020, with construction starting in 2022 and a possible start to service in 2024.

12 thoughts on “Las Vegas opts for bus rapid transit over light rail NEWSWIRE

  1. Since Las Vegas could be very hot, those preferred buses better be air-conditioned and if there are comparisons they must be implemented whether it will cost more to air-condition an individual bus compare to a entire light rail train. Expansive fossil fuel will be required to air-condition a bus whereas a light rail will be done by electric power. Why not use cleaner trolley buses instead of diesel fumed buses?

  2. Doug, the higher capacity of a light rail vehicle is only valuable if it is filled. A lightly utilized LRV costs more to operate than a bus on a per passenger mile basis.

  3. John, Tracks are already in place by McCarron Airport and on to Henderson ,but they are severed between Henderson and Boulder City. Of course,they would have to be upgraded.

  4. At least if the bus services doesn’t pan out, they can quickly convert that bus lane to regular veh traffic. If they laid tracks, it would be an expensive abandoned line. Of course, this would require politicians admitting they made a mistake in the first place.

  5. ROBERT – Another factor is the length of the haul. Many urban transit systems (I’m thinking of Milwaukee County buses, Milwaukee’s city trolley, Waukesha Metro buses, and Racine’s city buses, all in my area) cater to short-haul riders while the mid-distance and long-distance commutes are nearly 100% by auto.

    Thus, to compare a transit rider to an auto commuter is like the rabbit stew diluted with horsemeat: one rabbit, one horse. I’m not the least familiar with Las Vegas, but I have to ask, what’s one short transit line going to accomplish in a spread-out metro area? Drain off a tiny fraction of short-hauls and none of the long hauls.

    If a transit line in Vegas would serve some riders, consider it for that purpose. But don’t pretend it makes any impact whatsoever on the overall traffic counts, carbon emissions, etc. It won’t. Consider this: a bus driver or transit operator on that short line might himself commute twenty or thirty miles just to get to his post.

  6. Charles, What does exist in the Las Vegas area is a line that was built in 1930 to facilitate the building of Hoover Dam. At the time,Vegas was only a small town on the Union Pacific mainline from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City. No thought was ever given that the line to Hoover Dam would be anything else but temporary,but luckily the railroad persevered and remained mostly intact. Henderson grew up on the southeastern side of Vegas and with that came industry and the little branch line became relevant again at least as far as Henderson. It just so happened that McCarron International Airport was developed right next to this line just on the north side. Now even though for the time being,Las Vegas has decided against commuter rail,this little branch holds great potential as a future transit corridor,therefore it is imperative that the rest of the line between Henderson and Boulder City be left intact for future use at least as far as Boulder City as that city continues to grow and freeways into Las Vegas become increasingly crowded. This is course, would not be a cure all for mass transit in the Vegas area as buses would still be needed elsewhere,but the suburbs of Boulder City and Henderson along with McCarron Airport,the west side of the Vegas Strip,downtown and North Las Vegas could all be served by this lucky happenstance. Whereas building new commuter rail lines in a developed city like Las Vegas is often cost prohibitive and right of way would probably take years or decades to acquire,this line is already in place and just needs the necessary enhancements and to be reconnected at Railroad Pass between Henderson and Boulder City.

  7. Hopefully their bus rapid transit system actually works unlike the disaster we have here in Albuquerque.

  8. The railroad to Boulder City (although currently severed at Railroad Pass) should certainly be preserved for future commuter service from Boulder City,Henderson and McCarron Airport to downtown Las Vegas and North Las Vegas. By cooperating with Union Pacific,this could become a reality much sooner and for far less money that what has been discussed previously. With this route in use,the possibility also exist for a couple of stops just west of the Las Vegas Strip.

  9. Good decision here. For only $335 cost to build I might even get one for my backyard. But typo aside, I think that municipalities are going to look closely at the costs of these expensive light rail lines. At $750,000,000 to build (probably under estimated) and another $11,500,000 to operate )also probably underestimated) this has gotten to the point of being ridiculous. Most people are going to drive anyway. The line is only 8.7 miles long. That’s $86.2 million per mile. It doesn’t even pass the straight face test. Maybe politicians are finally smartening up. At least in Vegas they seem to be using commonsense.

  10. DOUG – Yes in theory, light rail is wonderful … if the light rail actually goes somewhere. Contrast my favorite and my least favorite light rail lines. Boston’s Green Line is crush loaded, makes a hugely positive impact on the city’s transportation needs, could use twice or more the capacity.

    At the opposite end of the scale, Milwaukee’s new trolley goes nowhere and accomplishes nothing.

    As I have posted, I don’t know Las Vegas but what’s proposed sounds a whole lot like Milwaukee and nothing at all like Boston.

  11. The real cost is not just the initial capital cost, but the 25 year operating cost and capital cost payback per passenger per mile. LRVs can carry far more people than a bus, with fewer operators, less maintenance with electric vs combustion engines, regeneration of power into the grid with braking, etc. LRVs would attract far higher ridership than a bus. Were those pro forma numbers run?

You must login to submit a comment