Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Feb. 19, 2010 | 2:01 a.m.
Mr. Sun: Most progressive cities are moving toward light rail projects or have them. Phoenix has light rail, and now I’ve heard Seattle is going forward on a light rail project. I know we are building the ACE system, but it’s not light rail! I know there was talk about building a light rail line from Henderson to somewhere in the north part of the valley.
How far along is Las Vegas in finally getting light rail?
• • •
How about nowhere?
Southern Nevada transportation officials have no plans at this time to pursue light rail. Although there has been talk, off and on, about using Union Pacific rail lines for commuter trains, that’s been dropped.
As you note, dear unidentified questioner, in its stead the Regional Transportation Commission is offering various “bus rapid-transit lines” — ACE, MAX — that the agency says offer many of the benefits of light rail at a fraction of the price. Like light rail, these buses have dedicated right of way and thus aren’t competing for space with traffic; they’re fast, have limited stops and platform loading; and fares are collected before passengers board.
One study put the U.S. average for new light rail construction at about $35 million a mile. The RTC is building a 14-mile bus rapid transit line for $50 million.
Some urban planners might argue that the higher price is worth it. One great benefit of permanent mass transit systems is the surrounding area begins to redevelop and in ways that create livable, urban neighborhoods. That development tends to be denser — read, taller buildings — and more pedestrian friendly.
The RTC argues that occurs along bus rapid transit lines too. But a bus, no matter how fancy, is less permanent than a train.
Now if local transit planners had a time machine and could return to the days when the ill-fated decision was made to build the monorail, and could instead persuade its founders to spend those hundreds of millions on light rail, or some other type of rail, the valley would have momentum toward something significant.
Alas, the monorail’s founders wanted something Disneyesque.
Questions for Mr. Sun can be sent to page8@lasvegassun.com.
Sadly, I agree that we probably will never see light rail. I used to take the bus to the airport to save on parking fees for a 2 week trip back East.
But honest to God, there were more fruits and vegetables on the bus than WalMart's Neighborhood Market, so I gave up. Plus the 15 minute drive from Henderson to the airport became a 90 minute Disney World slow motion ride on the bus. With our rotten economy, there's no way we'll have light rail...
For those that care....you don't want light rail! I have friends in Seattle and what a boondoggle nightmare this thing is. I did visit San Fran recently and their transportation system is really good....not cheap but really good. The big difference is the population base and density of the population. You guys in Vegas have neither nor does Seattle for that matter. Light rail is code for high taxes, few jobs and no riders. You'd be money ahead to buy a kazillion small buses that go everywhere at 10 minute intervals. Light rail will never work in Vegas. High speed rail to California might be another story...
Of course, Mr. Sun doesn't bother to mention his paper's role in killing light rail by smearing the legislative champions of it.
Green, Seattle's problem is the train only goes through one quarter of the city proper. Portland, San Jose, San Francisco, Sacramento and Salt Lake all have far more comprehensive and successful systems.
Frankly, though, light rail isn't exactly perfect. Too many agencies put in too many stops, and it winds up taking longer than commuting.
BringtheRain...your right and when you look at the billions being spend you can't help but wonder is this smart use of tax payers money. If they were to subsidize free bus routes (they're flexible, light rail isn't) ridership would go up and it would cost 10% of light rail.
Las Vegas will never attract new businesses and create a dense urban center without having a subway or light rail system. Bus transportation is way too slow to attract nearly as many commuters and riders as a light rail or subway system.
Light Rail transit would be a very good thing for Las Vegas. There would be many benefits, first of which would be massive government spending during a recessionary period. Secondly would be a reliable, non-polluting transit system. An economic shot in the arm.
I could see a North South LRT corridor, with transit buses serving commuters to stations along the line. Many cities in North America use this strategy to great effect. Stations serving the Air Port and UNLV would be a must. LRT systems, by the way, are usually big money makers.
There is discussion about a high speed rail link to California. LRT would tie in very nicely. Just think, quick, efficient, green transportation right from your local bus stop through to LA.
As to the Monorail. Money well wasted. Lets move on
light rail takes up way to much right of way.
the monorail is cheaper and can be built overhead.
The only problem with the monorail is that it does not extend to the airport and downtown.
Comparing a light rail system that would go to the airport and downtown and henderson is not a fair comparison because the monorail doesn't go their.
Finish the monorail and put in the moving sidewalks to get people back and forth to the strip and the problem will be solved for a lot less money.
Bob635:
With ya 1000% Amen..
Thanks to Harry Reid, we're not getting the Mag-Lev train to El Lay either.
Forget the moving sidewalks, bulldoze the monorail and build your light rail smack dab in the middle of the strip at street level. The strip and downtown will be much better served in that manner rather than trying to incorporate the poorly built poorly planned monorail into some messed up transportation network.
Buses are primarily used by poor people who can not afford cars and not by daily commuters.
Light rail on the other hand WOULD be used primarily by commuters.
The reason the monorail is not used by commuters is because it doesn't connect to near where people primarily live.
Regional Transportation Commission voted against a light rail a few years back even though their study recommended a light rail was needed.
The longterm cost is not that much more expensive than the max bus solution. When they bought into the Max bus you were not allowed to call it a bus. Sorry but its still a bus. Fancy buses are very expensive too. If you factor in the savings of not having to spend excessive additional money on the freeway system then I would say they are very close in longterm costs after 15yrs.
There is no logical reason NOT to build one from henderson up boulder highway and down fremont st to downtown, then may be have it go up main then to north 5th all the way to north las vegas.
Call the mayor and ask for him to push for a light rail in LV, it will only ever happen if the big politicians get behind the idea.
If we want people to rideshare then you must create dedicated rideshare lanes on every part of our freeway.
"Poor people" would use light rail too.
The fantasy of light rail produced a feeble shadow of what was promised in Seattle at extreme expense. That was during an inflated economy. With the economy as it is now and no actual upturn in sight, why add to the economic problems in LV. An NBA mentality with a video game reality just doesn't work.
Light rail is an awful idea. It was oversold big time back east and never delivered. It can never work in a sprawling city like LV. It will provide some short-term construction jobs; lousy service long-term financial headaches.
Question Mr. Sun:
Are you going to anwser anything new anytime soon? Snooozzzz.........
Light rail MIGHT be a good idea in general (I still have my doubts, but did any of you look at the actual proposal for Las Vegas? It went from Nv State College (which will probably close soon due to budget cuts) to downtown LV using the worst possible route. It would NOT have gone to UNLV, McCarran, Sam Boyd Stadium, ANY shopping mall or hospital, or 1/2 of the casinos. It would have had to squeeze along Dean Martin & Frank Sinatra drives, using the same logic of the Monorail--"almost close is good enough".
It also only served an area that had the lowest ridership of mass transit in the Valley. It didn't do anything to help Summerlin or the far East & West sides of the Valley. It did however, have a major stop right next to a chunk of land owned by one very influential State Sentator.
THAT is why they pushed this route. Other than that it sucked.
We are falling behind the rest of the world.
Our biggest casino industry competitor, Macau is building both a Light Transit System and a High Speed Train.
Our top convention competitor Orlando is also going to build a high speed train.
We are alson loosing what used to be Las Vegas's big sporting events to places like Dallas because we don't hava any modern first class arenas. When we did get a big sporting event, the NBA allstar game, players where late arriving to the arena because our trafic was so bad since there is no mass transit system in Las Vegas.
If we don't start building these things right now we are going to lose our presige as an international destination for entertainment and business to the cities that have 21st century first class infrustucture.
Light rail takes up too much road way. It blocks cross traffic and slow overall traffic speeds. It is an outdated and dumb idea.
The monorail needs to be connected to the airport.
This worked in Chicago, Atlanta, New York, Japan, Honk Kong, China, Paris, etc.
But it won't work in Las Vegas? That is just stupid. Special interests don't want the monorail to succeed.
Short term greed has to be stopped or the US will continue its slide to a 3rd and 4th world country.