METRICS Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
Britney Quail, George Benson, Jen Roberton, Michael Meyer
1 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following report is a high-level review of the Clark County Regional Transportation Plan, 2013-2035, the aim of which is to succinctly re-state the aims of a somewhat sprawling plan and to offer strategic direction-changes to help better realize its goals. Put simply, the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)’s plan is to fight back against the sprawling, auto-centric development of the greater Las Vegas areas by encouraging mode-shift, tightening land-use planning regulations, and by showing the costs of the previous style of development. Under Nevada law, the plan must be revisited every four years, meaning that in 2016, there is an opportunity to analyze the plan’s current directions and see what adjustments may be necessary. In looking at the plan again, our aim as consultants was and is to suggest high-level policy changes to the structure of the plan, focusing particularly on metrics and indicators related to each of the goals laid out. In two cross-cutting case studies that we undertook, one on cycling infrastructure and one on public transit, we also suggest finer-grained policy alternatives, as well, but fundamentally, our appraisal was that without significant strategic realignment of the goals with clear, measurable indicators and metrics, there would be no reasonable way to judge the efficacy of policies and investments undertaken by the RTC. Simply put, the linkage of these two is the wellspring from which meaningful sprawl-repair could take place in Las Vegas. Las Vegas as an urban area has almost defined by sprawl for almost the entirety of its existence. From its early days as an outgrowth of Hoover Dam construction workers, right up to the transition from mob-rule to investment bankers in the 1990’s, the city has expanded due to cheap money, cheap land, and little government intervention. With meteoric growth of +200% in the 1990s, Las Vegas now faces immense challenges: poor air quality, decaying infrastructure, water shortages, encouragement into natural habitats, and the human health-impacts of sprawl. Despite a commitment to combatting sprawl that dates back to this huge expansion in the 1990s, the RTC has not made any significant progress on the nine goals that guide its operations to this day. Our recommendations centre on linking goals and metrics, making it easier for the RTC to understand what success looks like for each of the areas that it hopes to see change in. These goals not only show how change is occurring on the ground, but add richness and depth to what success in each area actually means. We provide a range of metrics and indicators on each of the nine goals, focusing on both empirical measures, such as particular matter as an indicator for air quality, as well as qualitative measures, such as the street-scape condition for pedestrians. In our two case studies that we undertake, we aim to apply these metrics and indicators, as well as other specific policy choices that could be taken alternatively, or in addition to, what the RTC’s plan lays out. For cycling, we stressed that both quantitative and qualitative measures of inter-modality, as well as keeping a careful eye on mode-shift, will be crucial. Continued emphasis on creating bike infrastructure is likely to see greater movement towards this mode, but without these metrics, this will be difficult to ascertain. For transit, the new fleet of compressed-natural gas buses (CNG) is likely to have a strong impact on air quality measures, but these need to be publically presented and used to educate people on auto impacts on air quality. Fundamentally, however, both of these goals will not be achieved without a significant restriction on further greenfield land development and greater investment in non-automotive infrastructure.
Introduction | 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Plan Under Review The Clark County Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035 is a comprehensive, long-range transportation plan for the entirety of Las Vegas’ metropolitan region, known as the Las Vegas Valley. The plan promotes the vision of a “safe, convenient and effective regional transportation system that enhances mobility and air quality for citizens and visitors” (RTC, 2012). The plan is crafted by the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) of Southern Nevada, which acts as both the transit authority and the transit planning agency for the region. The current plan was adopted in 2012, and the RTC is in the process of crafting an updated plan for release in 2016. The new RTP will identify individual projects, introduce investment and funding strategies, and broadly lay out high-level sustainability and service goals for the region. Justification for Evaluation The RTC is required by federal law to update their Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) every 4 years. The plan in question dates back to 2008. In November of that year an initial version of the plan was released. The timeline for the proposals detailed in the original plan was 2009-2035. The plan was then reviewed and reissued in 2012, retaining the original 2035 timeframe. Now, in 2016, the RTP must again be updated in order to ensure it remains current, and in coherence with federal law. The review proposed will be released at end of year 2016 (RTC, 2012). The RTC has determined, along with this revision that the forecasted date will be advanced to 2040. Continuous updating of the RTP ensures the document remains current, and the projects implemented continue to strive towards the plan’s ambitious goals. Additionally, as the plan details investment strategies, periodic updating allows these figures to be adjusted to reflect the contemporary economic setting. However, the plan should also be evaluated on its ability to fulfil the plan’s goals, as set by the region, the State and the federal government. The evaluation below is an exploration into the linkages between proposed projects and plan goals. The evaluation provided by this project will inform the 2016 review prior to the finalization of the document. Objectives of Evaluation The following evaluation originally sought to explore if the RTP’s projects represented the interacting multi-modal transportation infrastructure described in the plan’s goals. Through analysis and investigation, it has been established that, though the overarching goals stated in the plan are strong, and adequate for the region’s sustainability vision, the plan is not comprehensive as it fails to appropriately address its goals through measurable metrics. As consultants trained in the City of Vancouver, we have a particular understanding of the metrics around environmental, equity and economic impacts. The following evaluation will not investigate the small-scale roadwork projects and funding schemes to determine their relevancy. Rather, the project will discuss fundamental changes required to the structure of the plan, and the plan’s failure to appropriately reference indicators and metrics against with which the goals can be held to account, and which assure the ability of suggested small-scale projects to accomplish the county’s vision for 2040.
LAS VEGAS VALLEY CONTEXT
Las Vegas Valley Context | 4
1.1 HISTORY OF THE REGION The Las Vegas seen today began to take shape in the 1960s. The long-derided entertainment industry, which had primarily arisen to serve the Hoover Dam workers in the 1930s, finally came into itself with the construction of the first of the soon-to-be ubiquitous casinos. The casinos would become part of the lifeblood of the city, not only defining its spatial form and urban morphology, but also shaping many of the city’s social functions and feelings, especially and including its transportation systems (Kraler, 2016; Littlejohn, 1999). Las Vegas is a car town, but it’s also a resort town, with all of the complex contradictions that that entails. As the casinos expanded and properties were bought and sold, many of them under the early leadership and watchful eye of Howard Hughes, Jr., the landform of the city grew quickly. Organized crime drove much of the early expansion of the casinos, particularly major crime families from the mid-West, and while they would continue to dominate a significant portion of the business, by the 1960s, more diverse investment was now also arising, particularly after the 1969 Corporate Gaming Act (Venturi, Brown, & Izenour, 1977).
Federal Government at auction) to developers to expedite construction. Roads were built, houses arose, and the city has continued to expand considerably. While the 2008 recession proved that the casino business was not ‘recession proof,’ as has often been claimed, it rebounded fairly quickly, and as of 2015, both Nevada and Clark County are still on a path to significant growth.
1.2 POPULATION AND GROWTH Rapid population growth is not a new phenomenon in the Las Vegas Valley. The 1950s and 1960s saw population growth rates of over 100%. Though this gave way to more staid numbers, 95% in the 1970s, down to 30% in the 1980s, the boom has returned. By the 1990s, growth rates were again up at 85%. However, since 1990 the local population of the Las Vegas Valley, not including visitors, has grown by a record 133% (Bernhard et al., 2008). Approximately a million additional residents have moved into the metropolitan region in the past 20 years. A visual demonstration of the impact of growth in the Valley can be seen in Figure 1, below.
There was now a growing focus of professionalization and standardization in Las Vegas, which also applies to land use policy. 1968 saw the first Las Vegas Valley Land Use plan, building on the very limited scope of previous planning efforts, which were otherwise unheard of elsewhere in the state. The 1970s and the 1980s saw the increasing professionalization of the gaming industry in Las Vegas, bringing in more money, and an increasingly empirical and more sophisticated approach to land development, entertainment, and the branding of the city (Bernhard, Green, & Lucas, 2008). With the economic downturn in the 1980s, Las Vegas’ growth rate declined significantly from the heady days of past decades. There were a suite of reasons for this, including “competition from Atlantic City, a national economic downturn, and the MGM Grand fire,” but the ever-more professionalized economic elite of Las Vegas successfully reoriented their strategy during the mid to late 1980s, by shifting their marketing to a broader audience of potential customers, including women and middle-class families. The so-called “Burger King revolution” revitalized the city, and saw its economic prospects return pronouncedly. Investment followed, with the creation of the iconic Mirage hotel in 1989, and soon-after, a public-private partnership to reinvigorate Las Vegas’ original downtown, Fremont Street (Bernhard et al., 2008; Clark County, n.d.).
Figure 1 - US Geological Survey aerial photos of the spatial growth of the city 1907-1995 (Acevedo et al., 2013)
What can also be seen from Figure 1, is the growth of the physical space of the city as its population increased. As depicted in Figure 2 (p. 5), the population of the urbanist centre of Las Vegas is roughly 3% of the total population in the county. Many of those million people who have moved into the Valley are not living in Las Vegas proper The various governments of Las Vegas assisted this but rather the surrounding metropolitan area. Again, this is growth substantially, including through a direct policy of well demonstrated in Figure 1. Las Vegas has a history of selling off government-owned land (itself bought from the sprawl, whose land use precedents continue to this day.
5 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
Las Vegas and Clark Country Population, 1950-2010 Las Vegas Population
Clark County Population
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Figure 2 - Population of Las Vegas and Clark County, since 1950. As of the 2014 estimate, Clark County has just over 2 million people it, while the City of Las Vegas 600,000 people in it (US Census, 2015)
Since 2008 and the fears surrounding the recession and its impact on Las Vegas’ key industry, the casinos, the local governments have been seeking to diversify the region’s economy. However, many jobs remain centered on the Strip, Freemont Street, the medical district and the downtown business district. The result of additional growth, sprawl-like development, and the central location of employment sectors is a boom in traffic volumes, which have grown faster than population. Over the past 20 years, traffic into the core has increased over 150% (RTC, 2012). As such, road congestion in the region has become a significant challenge.
1.3 CURRENT TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE The region is currently served by the RTC for its road infrastructure, public transit and bike lanes. Public transit is offered on buses, and special paratransit service is available to residents and tourists with disabilities on the condition that they have a special RTC issued identification card. Downtown Las Vegas and the Strip are
also currently serviced by four monorails that are privately owned, three by casino-hotels, and one longer monorail owned by the Las Vegas Monorail Corporation (RTC, 2012). Metro Las Vegas is off to a good start in achieving a higher dependency on bicycles for transportation. Las Vegas hosts North America’s largest bicycle industry shows every fall, which brings a lot of cycling tourism to the region. The League of American Bicyclists declared Las Vegas a ‘bike friendly’ city in 2013, due to its extensive trail system (Snel, 2013). 60,000 bikes are carried onto transit per month (on the buses run by RTC), and although this is an impressive amount of bikes it also reflects the gaps in Metro Las Vegas’ bikeable streets. RTC has also implemented a ‘Share the Road’ sign campaign on its various bike routes to help curb down the number of collisions between bicycles and motorized vehicles, which average at about eight incidents per year (RTC, 2012). RTC opened the new Bonneville Transit Station in November of 2010, which includes a fully functional bike hub. The Bonneville Transit Station Bike Center features 75
Las Vegas Valley Context | 6
indoor bike parking spots, showers, lockers, bike rental, bike maintenance tutorials and riding clinics. Patrons can access the Bike Center for $20 a year, and it seems to be successful so far (RTC, 2016).
Figure 5 - RTC Metro Las Vegas Bike Map (RTC, 2016)
Figure 3 - Transit Infrastructure: Many of the main arterials in Las Vegas are served by buses (RTC, 2012)
Much of the bike infrastructure existing in Metro Las Vegas links local trails in the nearby mountains and valleys to the suburban areas of Metro Las Vegas, including Henderson, Boulder City, and Summerlin. Metro Las Vegas’ bike infrastructure includes multi-use trail systems, which are pedestrian and bike only, bike lanes, which are lanes enclosed by a white strip for bicycles only but located next to moving cars and parked cars, and bike routes, which have bike capacity on the road’s shoulder but no stripped lanes (RTC, 2012).
which indicates bike compatibility. The yellow routes do not have intentional bike lanes, trails or routes. Instead they merely have a curb lane that is at least 1.2 meters wide where bikes are permitted to ride to the right of motorized vehicles, which makes many cyclists feel unsafe (RTC, 2016). The actual cycling specific infrastructure maps out to look a lot less robust:
Figure 6 - Cycle Infrastructure: Green lines represent the bike lanes in Las Vegas Paradise - Henderson. Cycling infrastructure is currently disconnected and seems to be tailored to trail riding on the brown lines going into the nearby mountains (Google Maps, 2016)
Figure 4 - Transit infrastructure: Bonneville Transit Station (RTC, 2012)
As of 2012, Metro Las Vegas had 476 kilometers of bike lanes, 87 kilometers of bike routes and 304 kilometers of shared use trails. The RTC bike map is misleading as the majority of the grid appears to have some sort of bike infrastructure. In fact, most of the grid is coloured yellow,
The google map view of Metro Las Vegas’ infrastructure shows a less generous view of the city’s bikeability. The suburbs close to off-road trails like Henderson and Summerlin still appear to have the most robust cycling infrastructure. However, the urbanized sections of Metro Las Vegas lack strong North-South connector routes, notable as the Strip, the city’s most prominent arterial, has banned bikes.
7 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
1.4 POLICY BACKGROUND Clark County, though legally just one of Nevada’s eleven counties, exists quite apart from the rest of its colleagues, since it contains over 70% of the state’s population. Because of its sheer size in both land and population, Clark County’s governing Commission is of huge importance to the area, and its planning culture is significantly more robust than the rest of the state’s, where there may not even be a department of planning. This is due to the continuous, spectacular growth that the region has experienced since the 1950’s (see: Figure 2), which has meant that the the region has desired a stronger hand in guiding land use and transportation planning. Because of the lack of planning culture in the rest of the state, there has been significant political conflict over how planning should be conducted in the area. In part, this saw the creation of the Southern Nevada Planning Coalition in 1999, which was an action taken by the State of Nevada to increase the planning and regional coordination abilities of Clark County. Since then, and particularly since the financial crash of 2008, this body has been acting to increase the coherency of the regional planning systems, particularly since so much of Clark County is unincorporated.
1. Improve Economic Competitiveness and Education 2. Invest in Complete Communities 3. Increase Transportation Choice Obviously, the last goal is of crucial importance in terms of this evaluation. The SNPC stresses that collaboration between the RTC and itself, as well as with the cities, is a necessity. The importance of a partnership between SNPC and RTC is evident in the high priority placed on transportation infrastructure projects, particularly light rail to low-income neighbourhoods. However, the desire for collaboration does not emerge clearly in the RTC’s own plan, which focuses mostly on street improvements and expansions (Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition, 2015).
1.5 MAJOR CHALLENGES IN THE REGION 1.5.1 Water and Smart Growth
The central pieces of legislation that guide the county and its internal actors are: the Southern Nevada Stronger (SNS) Regional Plan (2015), the Regional Transportation Commission’s Transportation Strategy (2012), and the various land use plans of the four cities in the County (Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, and Boulder City). The Southern Nevada Regional Plan, last updated in 2015, speaks to the previous discoordination that exists between the municipalities and the unincorporated areas. As the plan says darkly: “The rapid and extended population growth over the past 20 years has put pressure on natural resources and public sector funding for infrastructure, social service, and schools. If development continues as it has in the past, our current challenges will only continue to get worse.” (Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition, 2015)
To meet these challenges, moving forward, both land use and transportation planning will have to very clearly change dramatically. The vision that has resulted from this planning process speaks to these desired changes and is arguably the region’s most explicit declaration of a dramatically different future. The plan desires, overall, the reinvention of Clark County as a multi-modal hub, with mixed use communities, with a strong social fabric supported by different community institutions. The three, overarching goals which guide the plan, based on these values, are:
Figure 7 - Hoover Dam construction c. 1934 (USBR, 2015)
Many studies point to the water availability and water management as being a key concern for the Las Vegas region. Water was originally accessed by shallow wells dug in the mid-1800s in addition to a number of natural springs. The Colorado River Compact in 1922 ensured that 300,000 acre feet of water was provided per year from the Colorado River. Construction of the Hoover Dam in 1931, creating Lake Meade, provided a consistent source of clean water to Las Vegas and the surrounding region. As early as the 1950s, concerns about an impending water availability crisis began to rise (Roosa, 2003). The concern grew as irrigation increased and rapid urbanization
Las Vegas Valley Context | 8
Figure 8 - The Nevada desert outside of Las Vegas (publicdomainpictures.net, 2016)
continued. A compounding problem was that for many years Las Vegas residents were among the highest per capita water consumers in the country. Rather than addressing water availability by regulating growth, solutions consisted of developing new sources of water; proposals even included desalinization of water pumped from the Pacific Ocean (Roosa, 2003). Similar proposals for developing new water sources had persisted to this day.
growth is acclaimed as being an excellent method of reducing per capita imperviousness, thereby improving water quality. This is the prevailing wisdom, however skeptics do propose that measures of imperviousness vary and so this claim is hard to prove empirically (Pelley, 2004).
Water conservation solutions are proposed and being undertaken throughout the Las Vegas Valley. These solutions include indoor and outdoor, site-by-site, water efficiency interventions (Sonora Institute, 2010). However, one technique pertinent to the context of transportation planning is the implementation of smart growth principles in the broader development and land use context. Smart growth is an approach to land use and development that came out of the State of Maryland, when the state began investing in compact development in the fight against sprawl (Daniels & Lapping, 2005). Smart growth principles include development intensification in ‘growth areas’, mixed use development, walkable neighbourhoods, facilitating mobility choice, and community collaboration in development decisions (Smart Growth Online, 2015). Smart growth advocates include professionals ranging from planners, designers and engineers, to crime prevention specialists, politicians and public health workers. One result of smart growth investment is a reduction in water usage and increases in groundwater replenishment. This is especially true in contexts where state investment is targeted around development and infrastructure funding in the aforementioned ‘growth areas’ (Sohn, n.d.).
An increasing concern for the Las Vegas Valley, as mentioned in a number of state and local documents is the need to protect virgin desert - that is desert untouched by human habitation or development. The biggest threat to virgin desert is greenfield development, most often occurring in rapidly growing regions like Las Vegas. The Regional Transportation Commission, through a cost management strategy, has said that they cannot afford to build additional transportation system capacity. Greenfield development requires investment in additional capacity in this way, while putting increasing pressure or burden on existing transportation infrastructure.
Smart growth is also linked to improving water quality. The prevalence of impervious land cover - including surfaces like buildings, roads, parking lots, and roofs - increases runoff and in turn decreases water quality (Pelley, 2004). The extent of impervious land cover increases in sprawling urban environments like Las Vegas. Smart
1.5.2 Protecting Virgin Desert
A main tenant of smart growth is the concentration of development in specific growth areas, while preserving open space and farm land (Daniels & Lapping, 2005). The preservation of virgin desert may be a more achievable goal than others. The federal government owns 87 percent of the land in Nevada, helping the attainability of large scale preservation (Roosa, 2003). One big hurdle for smart growth advocates is that private land acquisitions are often required by state or local governments in order to enact land preservation requirements (Daniels & Lapping, 2005). Impending development pressures - especially in a region experiencing rapid growth - often result in land sales of privately owned land for future greenfield development. Preservation on either a state or local level is one approach to fighting development pressures that threaten virgin desert.
9 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
1.5.3 Congestion, Affordability, and Traffic
1.5.4 Regional Coordination
Rapid urbanization, population growth, increases in visitors, and consistent sprawling land use and development pattern decisions have led to consistent increases to traffic in the Las Vegas Valley. Congestion is a large concern for the region as both per capita vehicle miles travelled and per capita congestion delay continue to increase (Sonora Institute, 2010). Increased congestion for both of these metrics has a number of implications for the Las Vegas Valley. One important implication is that traffic congestion creates additional costs for travelers. These costs are not only associated with fuel consumption, but also the need for many residents to rely on a private vehicle as their primary mode of transport.
With rapid urbanization throughout Southern Nevada, there has also come a lack of collaboration between local governments, especially around strategically guiding growth and development (Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition, 2015). The results are disjointed land use patterns, reduced access to services and amenities, lack of housing choice, growth concentrated on the periphery, and job and wage disparity (Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition, 2015). It is possible that stronger regional planning can address these growing challenges.
Another implication of increased traffic and congestion is decreased air quality. Internal combustion engines produce chemicals as a result of the combustion process. These chemicals include nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and fine particulate materials (Boheman & Janssen Va De Laak, 2003). Higher concentrations of these chemicals is a result of increased traffic and congestion. Higher concentrations also represent a real health risk for residents living in regions with high or increasing levels of congestion (Boheman & Janssen Va De Laak, 2003). Investment that results in decreased traffic and congestion will lead to improved air quality. The Regional Transportation Plan suggests car shares and cycling infrastructure as contributing to the goal of affordable sustainable transportation options (both of which may reduce congestion).
Strong regional planning and coordination has many benefits. Regional planning, by necessity is multidisciplinary; including many actors and stakeholders from a variety of different fields of interest (Cerne, 2008). The scope of regional planning objectives and decisions are broad and consider many variables - economic, social, and environmental - and often focus on resource distribution. It often responds to problems in urban regions related to rapid urbanization, need for increased standards of mobility, and economic malaise (Cerne, 2008). Regional planning extends from local planning, in contexts where increased coordination is needed - as is the case of the Las Vegas Valley. Tools that regional planning employs that are relevant for the challenges faced by Las Vegas are (1) power over directing public investment; and (2) the power to encourage or discourage private initiatives through incentives and disincentives related to land use control, environmental regulation, and industrial development (Cerne, 2008).
Figure 9 - A bus station and traffic in Las Vegas (Photo Credit: George Benson)
RECOMMENDATIONS
11 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
2.1 LINKING GOALS AND METRICS In order for plans to be effective, both in implementation and monitoring, metrics are a much needed means of measuring the impact of an action, project, or policy direction. If the region is able to clearly understand the impacts of their past actions, then they can orient future activity to better achieve their stated goals. The Las Vegas Valley RTP lacks metrics through which appropriate evaluation can be achieved. In addition, metrics add both a qualitative and quantitative depth to stated goals, which are otherwise necessarily laid out in broad terms. Without metrics to measure the successes of a project, in relation to the plan’s overarching goals, it is difficult to determine the success of the plan overall, no less the success or failure of individual projects, as well.
• •
vehicles Identify typical noise emissions levels by vehicle type and road type Approximate number of animals killed per year on major roadways and near major habitat areas
CLARK COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN GOALS: i. To implement transportation systems that improve air quality and contribute to the long-term environmental sustainability of Southern Nevada communities ii. To develop fully integrated modal options iii. To enhance the efficiency of existing tranportation facilities iv. To improve access to mass transportation facilities and services
In our analysis of the Las Vegas plan, we felt there was insufficient linking of goals with metrics in the original plan, both in terms of defining measurable outcomes, as well as a providing a rigorous understanding of what each of the goals means. In some cases, such as with air quality, there is a legislated mandate that informs what metrics are to be used and how. However, throughout the publications of the RTC, this is never explicit to the public or in the external-facing technical documents. In the 2016 review of the plan, metrics ought to be established in order to better support the RTP’s goals and provide a method to trace the individualized funding schemes and projects to a goal, as well as traceable, evaluation processes.
To develop fully integrated modal options:
2.2 SUGGESTED METRICS
•
In order to better inform, and support the 2016 review of the RTP, the consultant identified relevant metrics and indicators for each of the nine goals that the plan sets out to achieve, they are listed below. The plan’s stated goals are also detailed to the right. We believe these metrics will provide the missing links required to tie projects and investments to the plan’s goals and improve the evaluation process for the next proposed RTP review in 2020.
•
To implement transportation systems that improve air quality and contribute to the long-term environmental sustainability of Southern Nevada communities:
•
•
• •
Perform measurements of particulate matter, including ultrafine particulates (UFP), black carbon (BC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO), and other dangerous chemicals in the air based on standard levels of EPA, CDC, and WHO Perform measurements of carbon and other GHGs (e.g., hydrofluorocarbons) emitted per year Create a cross-section of vehicles on the road in Las Vegas, with emissions profiles of the most common
v. To secure funding for the expansion, operation and maintenance of transportation systems and routes vi. To enhance public awareness of, and support for, the regional transportation system vii. To improve safety for all travelers viii. To improve the security of the transportation system ix. To support more efficient freight movement
• • •
Measure the number of transit route connections at stops (buses and rapid transit) throughout the Region Measure connection points between greenways/biking infrastructure and transit route stops Evaluate the quality of sidewalks surrounding transit stops Measure park-and-ride capacity and frequency of use Identify areas where buses, riders waiting for buses, bike paths, sidewalks, and parking are in conflict or where multi-modal conflict occurs Maintain year-to-year counts of vehicle miles travelled (VMT), on personal, municipal, and regional bases
To enhance the efficiency of existing transportation facilities: • • • •
Assess transit ridership levels and bus trip frequency Map congestion hot spots to target traffic alleviation strategies Measure number of pedestrian and cyclist sensors/buttons which trigger light changes at crossings to determine their impact on congestion Determine the average length of intersection crossings (for arterials and secondary roads)
Recommendations | 12
To improve access to mass transportation facilities and services:
To support more efficient freight movement: •
• • • • • •
Assess gaps in sidewalk network/ sidewalk network connectivity Determine sidewalk quality at stations, stops and connection points to ensure AAA standards Assess gaps in biking infrastructure/greenways Compare transit ridership reduced-fare programs (use, cost and frequency) with assumed regional need Map sidewalk density across the Region Measure the number of curb cuts (which ensure accessibility for all modes (including wheelchairs)
To secure funding for the expansion, operation and maintenance of transportation systems and routes: • •
Link co-benefits that can be measured and achieved with other projects (e.g., linking stormwater maintenance with streetscape improvements) Estimation of projects’ impact on other areas of city activity (e.g., on health spending).
To enhance public awareness of, and support for, the regional transportation system: • • •
Annual survey data of Clark County on their opinions, awareness, and preferences for RTC services Regional and sub-regional ridership of public transportation Website views, transit app usage, public meeting attendance
To improve safety for all travelers: • • • •
Map reported incidents of harassment on public transit and on roads (e.g. road rage) Measure areas with high collision rates using regional data Audit quality of pedestrian crossing and bike lanes using NACTO and Federal Highway Administration standards Determine the number of protected intersections across the Region
To improve the security of the transportation system: • •
• •
Perform a safety audit of transit stations, bus stops and buses Consult community needs regarding request-stop programs (to let people off between stops) between 9pm until 5am on routes outside of downtown and the strip Map of remote bus stops with intention of installing lighting and emergency phone After each intervention is implemented, administer satisfaction survey
• • • •
Annual tonnage of freight moved through Clark County Net contribution of the freight sector to city economic performance, productivity and competitiveness (Cui et al, 2015) Measure freight vehicle trips, kilometres, travel time Count number of freight vehicles Changes in freight operating costs
2.3 STRENGTHENING GOALS The metrics outlined above could be used to create linkages between the RTP’s projects and investments, and its high-level goals. However, quantifying those metrics is an equally important element currently missing in the plan. The RTC should be describing their targets in numbers, or at minimum in a tangible fashion, in order to be held accountable for their choice of projects and capital investments. Detailing measurable targets which small-scale, site specific projects or investments would contribute to, would not only help the RTC stay focused and organized internally, especially in regards to decision-making and budget allocation. Additionally, providing quantified metrics in the RTP, which is publically released, and provided to the federal government, ensures that the RTC is accountable to their goals. Cities worldwide describe and quantify their transportation goals in similar plans to those of the RTC. These plans, use some specific metrics in describing their programs and targets. A common example is the goal of reducing air pollution, the metric may then be the modal shift of single occupancy vehicle users to non-automotive transportation modes. The quantification of this metric is likely to be an X% shift over Y years. This style of quantification is currently missing in the Las Vegas Valley Plan and we highly recommend that it, and similar metrics, be incorporated into the 2016 re-release of the RTP.
CASE STUDIES
Case Studies | 14
CASE STUDIES ON GOALS, PRINCIPLES, AND IMPLEMENTATION In order to demonstrate the effectiveness, and potential metrics available to the RTC, two case studies have been conducted on issues within the transportation system of the Las Vegas Valley: cycling infrastructure and public transit. Both issues are addressed in the RTP, and will contribute to the plan’s overall ambitious sustainability goals. However, we felt that neither had been appropriately or adequately addressed through the use of metrics in the plan. The case studies below will describe the situation in Las Vegas, referring to the historical and policy context detailed in sections above, then will discuss metrics, linking the projects discussed and plans’ goals.
3.1 CASE STUDY ON CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE IN LAS VEGAS VALLEY 3.1.1 Introduction Cities across North America are looking to cycling for its health, environmental and economic benefits in transportation planning. Investing in cycling impacts the health of riders by being a form of active transportation, the environment by not emitting harmful chemicals, and the economy by providing affordable transportation options. Las Vegas is home to the biggest bike industry show in North America, yet paradoxically has yet to fully integrate cycling infrastructure into its transportation system. Cycling is increasing as a viable commuting mode in the City of Sin, with the League of American Bicyclists declaring Las Vegas a ‘bike friendly’ city in 2013, due to its extensive trail system and emphasis on increasing commuter biking in its most recent plan (interbike, 2016; Snel, 2013). Steps have been taken in the implementation of the transportation plan to invest in bikes as a viable commuter option in Las Vegas, as much of the existing infrastructure for bikes are recreational. Although we know fifty million dollars was invested in bike infrastructure in Metro Las Vegas in 2002, a new Bike Center in Bonneville Transit Station was launched in 2013, 60,000 bikes are carried onto transit every month, and there is an anticipated
expansion of bike lanes by 634 km, including 541 km of bike routes and 919 km of off-street shared use trails, the plan lacks a focused evaluation criteria for how the implementation process is going. We propose a linked evaluation of the current bike plan in Las Vegas through a series of metrics centered on five out of the nine goals put forth by the plan. This case study evaluation will address the following goals: i.
ii. iii. iv. v.
To implement transportation systems that improve air quality and contribute to the long-term environmental sustainability of Southern Nevada communities To develop fully integrated modal options To improve access to mass transportation facilities and services To secure funding for the expansion, operation and maintenance of transportation systems and routes To improve safety for all travelers
The following is a case study of cycling transportation planning that addresses these individual goals and the metrics used to evaluate their progress within the small scale projects implemented through the Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035. This will formulate where goals have been met and where work still must be done. Bike routes, bike shares, and the Bonneville Transit Station are three projects undertaken in the plan that is assessed through the goals and metrics that we put forth.
Figure 10 - A street in Las Vegas (Photo Credit Jen Roberton)
15 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
3.1.2 Bike Routes Increasing bike routes in Las Vegas meets most of the plans goals within our prescribed metrics. Air quality, integrated modal options, increasing transportation systems and routes, and improved safety all relate to the increase in bike routes implemented through the Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035. Minimal metrics are taken to deduce the significance that increasing bike routes will have on the goals put forth by the plan. Bike routes are known to increase bike ridership in cities. Bike routes can potentially slow down car traffic, making streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists (NACTO, 2016). Bike routes are also correlated to an increase in air quality through the reduction of noise and carbon emissions (Lindsay, Macmillan, & Woodward, 2011; The David Suzuki Foundation, 2014). The Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035 cites the 2009 National Household Travel Survey to make the case for bike routes on these terms. The survey found that in America around 40% of all trips are within two miles (or 3.2 kilometers), and around 27% of all trips are one mile or less (or 1.6 kilometers or less).
campaign adheres to standards around increasing the visibility of cyclists through signage, and should be implemented where the City has measured a high number of multimodal collisions between drivers and cyclists (NACTO, 2016). Bike lanes, routes, and trails are also to be expanded significantly by 2035, achieving the goal of expanding transportation modes through an increase in infrastructure. The plan proposes a total of 1110 kilometers of bike lanes (adding 634 kilometers), 628 kilometers of bike routes (adding 541 kilometers), and 1223 kilometers of off-street shared use trails (adding 919 kilometers) (RTC, 2012). It is notable that bike lanes and trails are prioritized in breadth over bike routes. Bike lanes and trails are preferable in a context where there is an existing high volume and speed motorized traffic on a street as they provide extra protection to the cyclist, despite being more expensive than bike routes (NACTO, 2016). Notably, the
These distances are amenable to the distances most people are willing to commute by bicycle. The plan also makes the case that increasing the use of bicycles in Metro Las Vegas will help address the county’s obesity problem by providing a form of active transportation, as well as helping the air quality of the city by getting people out of their cars (RTC, 2012). A context specific study in Las Vegas linking an increase in bike ridership to noise and carbon emission levels is needed to solidify the correlation between cycling and environmental impacts. A key tenant of the bike infrastructure proposed in the plan is inter-modality. The plan’s complete streets initiative seeks to better integrate multi-modal transportation between buses, cars, and bicycles. Linked bikeways, pedestrian facilities, transit services, and roadways are proposed to ensure connectivity. New mixed-use developments in Metro Las Vegas are also mandated to provide cycling facilities that connect to nearby cycling infrastructure. The goal of complete streets according to the regional transportation plan is to accommodate as many modes as possible on a given street, including bicycles (RTC, 2012). We recommend that the success of integrating modes be measured over time by calculating where multimodal conflicts of uses occur to then propose positive changes to the safety of Las Vegas streets. Some considerations are made in the plan on increasing the safety of cyclists. RTC has also implemented a ‘Share the Road’ sign campaign on its various bike routes to help curb down the number of collisions between bicycles and motorized vehicles, which average at about eight incidents per year (RTC, 2012). The ‘Share the Road’
Figure 11 - A bicycle lane in Las Vegas (Photo Credit: Jen Roberton)
Case Studies | 16
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official (AASHTO) protocol state that unmarked bike infrastructure such as bike routes and bike compatible streets are temporary solutions to a lack of infrastructure due to the reduced safety of users on this infrastructure (FHWA, 2016, p. 19). Although the plan is meeting the requirement for expansion of transportation networks, it is not necessarily doing so with metrics related to multimodal collisions and safety in mind. The regional plan provides details on an upcoming project to implement improved bike lanes in Las Vegas’ downtown. The upcoming ‘Green Bike Lane’ project will include a network of bike lanes painted green in the city’s downtown.
Figure 12 - Map of Green Bike Lanes Downtown (RTC, 2012)
The green bike lanes have already begun to be implemented throughout the downtown (Review Journal, 2013). They coincide with the location of the Bonneville Transit Station Bike Center, an upcoming bike share program, and the city’s densest area (RTC, 2012). The lanes are connecting dense land use with multimodal commuting. Painting bike lanes green is a popular design feature. The colour green minimizes confusion for road users between bike lanes and other traffic control colours. The paint also discourages illegal parking in the bike lane and increases the visibility of the bike lanes and cyclists riding on them (NACTO, 2016). The increased visibility of green bike lanes does meet the safety requirement in its design, but metrics will still need to be gathered comparing collision rates downtown with other areas to deduce its effectiveness. The implementation of the green bike lanes connect directly to the launch of the new bike share system.
3.1.3 Bike Share The upcoming bike share program was anticipated to launch in 2013, but has been pushed back to late summer 2016. Similar to the bike routes, it addresses the plan’s goals of reducing air pollution, increasing multimodal usages, and expanding transportation systems. The funding model has not been released to the public yet, but the regional plan states that the bike share is to be either free or affordable, addressing some of the equity considerations in bike infrastructure. The bike share will start as a pilot in the downtown area, due to its density, recent addition of the green bike lanes, and existing bike infrastructure, with the potential to expand into other neighbourhoods. The bike share is anticipated to help address the ‘last mile’ problem, where there is a mile or so of a gap between places of work or residence and nearby transit stops (BikingLasVegas, 2016; RTC, 2012, 2016b). RTC is currently undergoing public consultation to decide where the bike share stations should be located in the downtown (RTC, 2016b).
Figure 13 - RTC BikeShare Website (RTC, 2016)
According to the Nevada Revised Statutes, where permitted, bikes can ride in traffic and share the same rights and responsibilities as motorized vehicles. There are no helmet laws in Nevada, which simplifies the implementation of bike share programs, as the company would not need to provide a helmet to users, as well as increasing cycling’s accessibility to lower income individuals who may not have the funds to purchase a helmet. Bicycles may not ride more than two abreast, meaning that several bicycles taking up a lane conventionally used by cars in protest or simply for commuting, is illegal. Cyclists must have lights and reflectors at night, which helps increase visibility on what are reportedly often poorly lit streets. Cars must be at least three feet (or one meter) away from cyclists when passing, and cyclists must ride as near to the right side of the roadway as “predictable” (Desilva, 2015; State of Nevada, n.d.). We recommend that the upcoming bike share system adhere to the safety regulations put forth by these laws, but that data should be collected on collisions
17 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
occurring when a car is passing a cyclist to see if the existing regulations keep all mode users sufficiently safe.
3.1.4 Bonneville Transit Station The Bonneville Transit Station is a great example of integrated modal options in mass transportation facilities. Additionally, the transit station also addresses the goals of reducing air pollution by promoting transit and cycling. The station includes a Bike Center that features seventy five indoor bike parking spots, showers, lockers, bike rental, bike maintenance tutorials, and riding clinics (RTC, 2012, 2016a). The Bike Center integrates multimodal uses in Las Vegas in a central hub. The secure bike parking featured in the station decreases the risk of theft for users as well. We discovered that 60,000 bikes are carried onto transit per month on the buses run by RTC. Although this is an impressive amount of bikes, reflecting the want to expand upon multimodal uses, it also reflects the gaps in Metro Las Vegas’ bikeable streets (RTC, 2012). We recommend that a survey be conducted sampling those who bring their bikes onto transit to judge if this use reflects a need for more bike infrastructure or if the pairing of transit and cycling is preferable for users. The data collected from this survey should determine if future investments in projects like the Bike Center at Bonneville Transit Station are the best for users, or if it would be preferable to create bike infrastructure that could help further lessen the commuter burden on transit. It is possible that the multimodal use of transit and cycling reflects a need to invest in more efficient transit as well. All options should be addressed in the proposed public engagement through a survey.
3.1.5 Conclusion The planners in Metro Las Vegas hope that upon implementation of their transportation plan: “Southern Nevada will be a national leader in the provision of bicycle facilities. Not only will these facilities provide an attractive and viable option for using active modes of transportation in the Las Vegas area, they will also improve the livability of local communities, promote a healthy lifestyle for residents, and ultimately help sustain a growing regional economy by making the area more attractive for businesses.” (RTC, 2012)
In order to achieve the goals around sustainability, healthy living, and economic growth, the RTC invested in bike infrastructure improvements, which are to be primarily implemented through bikes lanes, trails and routes, a bike share system, and a bike hub. Although, Metro Las Vegas is making great strides towards fully integrating the bicycle as a viable mode of
transportation, more data is needed to evaluate the progress of these interventions in pursuit of the goals outlined in the plan and proposed metrics. We realize that on top of the measurable constraints to implementing bikes as a commuter mode, a cultural shift also needs to take place around promoting cycling. Urban design considerations used to implement bike lanes and routes must also be sensitive to the particular needs of Metro Las Vegas as a city as well as the safety and comfort of the cyclist to address the desirability of cycling. Although the RTC plan is on the right track, there is still a lot of room for improved breadth of cycling infrastructure with more detail paid to how cycling specific infrastructure improvements fit into the broader proposed plan.
3.2 Case Study on Public Transit in Las Vegas Valley 3.2.1 Introduction Transit represents a cross-cutting area of action throughout the plan. Almost all of the stated goals of the plan are involved in the realisation of an efficient transit system, which in turn will impact the outcomes of many of the stated goals. Las Vegas, while undoubtedly a city highly dependent on automotive transport, maintains an extensive bus system that navigates throughout the entire grid of the city. From the RTC: “The RTC Transit system operates a fleet of 402 vehicles, including a total of 120 hybrid/electric powered buses, which includes all 60 BRT vehicles; and 52 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueled vehicles. The transit system consists of 30 regular local service routes and 8 BRT/Express lines. The extremely successful ‘Deuce’ line on the Las Vegas Strip remains the most popular route in terms of passenger volume, attracting an average of over 650,000 riders every month, contributing to a total fixed route monthly ridership average of more than 4.8 million passengers.” (RTC, 2012)
Las Vegas has several highly utilized routes, both along its BRT-serviced rapid transit corridors, as well as on regular service routes throughout the city. It continues to struggle with the fact that only 10% of its bus stops service over 60% of its passengers, indicative of crowding, pass-ups, and under-utilized routes elsewhere in the region. Furthermore, the RTC is trying to diversify services especially with regards to paratransit, and aims to allow residents to opt for more multi-modal trips wherever possible. An existing street-grid that is large and landforms that, while dense, are highly private and hardened make this a difficult proposition. Land use changes will be an essential part of any further effort to revitalize the city, though, as noted, there is still significant promise with existing densities as high as they are (14th amongst the U.S.’s 50 largest urban areas).
Case Studies | 18
3.2.2 Compressed Natural Gas Replacement ($2 million — ongoing)
This case study, addressing both implementation and monitoring, touches on several of the RTC’s overarching goals:
(CNG) Vehicle
To implement transportation systems that improve air quality and contribute to the long-term environmental sustainability of Southern Nevada communities To develop fully integrated modal options To enhance the efficiency of existing transportation facilities To improve access to mass transportation facilities and services To enhance public awareness of, and support for, the regional transportation system
The RTC’s decision to move towards CNG buses is a significant investment and sensible policy shift for the region, considering it is still ‘un-attaining’ status as far as PM10 and other air quality measures. The CNG buses are cheaper to run than traditional diesel, and are cleaner, quieter, and more efficient. As a new technology being implemented locally, they may also serve to improve and increase the notoriety and awareness of the regional transportation system. In the 2015-2018 financial plan for the RTC, the bus procurement programme continued as planned, with procurement not only of additional buses, but also repair and fueling infrastructure as well.
As with the prior case study, the following aims to apply these goals through the cross-cutting example of Las Vegas’ transit system and the various actions recommended in the Regional Transportation Plan. Applying the suggested metrics, as well as drawing comparisons and inspiration from other examples, two particular projects are highlighted as a place for the metrics and goals outlined above to be applied.
In terms of the goals of the plan, the gradual turnover of the fleet towards CNG buses will work towards increasing Las Vegas air quality. In addition, while not growing the capacity of the system per se, these additional investments further pursue the RTC’s goal of a more efficient transportation system in terms of fuel consumption in its fleet.
i. ii. iii. iv. v.
Smog-forming pollution (NOx and VOCs) from different means of commuting Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2
ng
ng
ki W al
Tr ol tri c ec El
40 ith w s Bu sit
Tr an el ie s
Figure 14 - NOx and VOCs compared across different transportation modes (BC Air Quality n.d.)
Bi ki
le y
Bu
ng er se Pa s
Pa s 10 ith w
s
s
er s se
ng
or SU V s Bu sit
ie se lT ra n D
D
or SU V
Li gh tT ru ck
D ie se l
Li gh tT ru ck
ol as G n li oo rp
Ca n so 2Pe r
G as ol in e
in e
in e
2-
Au to m ob ile
ile ob Au to m
yb ol as G
Pe r
so
n
H
Ca
yb
rid
rp oo
li n
H
Au to m
ob
rid
ile
0
19 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
Fundamentally, in terms of the goals that the RTC aims to achieve overall, the purchasing of CNG buses represents a relatively minor gain in terms of air quality. Of the massive number of automotives on the road, only a small number of them are buses, even though they are larger and produce more particulate material (PM). In order to better achieve the two main goals associated with the CNG bus transition, the RTC will need to think bigger and reach for larger, more systemic changes. The air quality metrics we suggest offer a finer-grained understanding of what elements are present in Las Vegas’ air, but they are still a very high-level analysis when performed on a regional or urban scale. The RTC, in partnership with research institutions, businesses, and state and federal agencies, should look to monitor PM statistics along key arterials and, where possible, isolate corridors of heavy transit usage, trying to draw correlations between the removal of diesel buses and higher air quality. While not a transformative action itself, small changes that are noted can be used as basis upon which more transformative actions can be based. Corridor-specific numbers can also be paired with ongoing research regarding the health impact of transportation systems on those who live alongside them — the RTC’s mandate to pursue an agenda of environmental justice will be of particular importance here. On a larger level, however, the RTC has an opportunity to engage citizens throughout Las Vegas more strenuously in the creation of sustainable, air-enhancing transportation choices. As Figure 15 shows, voluntary transportation control measures have had minimal effectiveness in the reduction of carbon monoxide. Even a more rigorous transportation demand management process may not have much further impact; this is where a programmatic system of education on the air quality impacts of driving and a more intensive supply-side management incentivising of transit can take place. Further, removal of parking, greater presence of HOV and transit-only lanes, and, wherever possible, greater frequency of transit can all induce movement away from car usage, shrinking both the air quality impact, and increasing the overall efficiency of the transit-aspect of Las Vegas’ transportation system.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emission Reduction
Status
0.08%
Ongoing; the RTC’s TDM program is funded through the duration of the TIP
Alternative Fuels Program for Government Fleets
0.12%
Ongoing; local government committed to alternative fuels program
Previously Adopted Enforceable Control Measure
Adoption Date
Status
Control Measures
Voluntary Transportation Control Measure TDM
Motor Vehicle Inspection & Maintenance Program Fleet Over
1978
Ongoing
1967
Ongoing
Particulate Matter 10 Microns or Less (PM10) Control Measures Transportation Construction Rules 90-94
Status Ongoing: all transportation construction projects must conform. All transportation construction contracts, regardless of funds source, include the requirement to conform to Rules 90-94
Figure 15 - Air quality measures and their relatively effectiveness (RTC Transportation Investment Plan 2015-2018, 2015).
County continues to allow new development on virgin desert land, not only threatening ecosystems, but also further burdening the region with infrastructure costs is a major strategic burden on the part of the city. As an individual investment, the McCarran Monorail investment is a smart choice, upholds almost all of the goals of the plan — but it is clear that it is not enough on its own.
3.2.3 Las Vegas Monorail from McCarran International One of the central challenges that the RTC faces in Airport to MGM Monorail Station ($475 million — 2020) advancing its infrastructure procurement beyond just The Las Vegas Monorail from McCarran International Airport to MGM Monorail Station project, bringing another monorail route to one of the busier corridors in Las Vegas, is one of the more impressive transit investments in the Regional Transportation Plan. Unfortunately, this is not an asset to the plan overall. Despite strong economic pressures that would otherwise incent the region to adopt a more rigorous urban containment boundary, Clark
what has been provisioned in the transportation plan is money. The RTC relies heavily on a mixture of local, state, and federal money to fund its infrastructure projects. Investments in the mid-2000s, particularly in light of the financial crisis in 2007-2008, mean that the region still has significant debt to be paid off. But a lack of money should not be an impediment to smart investments and sensible long-term planning. Though it has been clear that it wants to spend the next few years paying down its debt, there is
Case Studies | 20
no reason that the RTC cannot be engaged in a planning exercise right now to (1) identify where the greatest opportunities for transit expansion are, and (2) where additional funds may be drawn from in the future, either through innovative partnerships, or better lobbying for money from higher orders of government. In relation to this, the region may consider the reorienting existing funding streams — such as the local gas tax — either towards transit, or the creation of additional taxation measures (as has happened in Los Angeles and Seattle) to specifically fund transit exclusively. Were such a stream to be created and Las Vegas seen as one of the urban areas in the U.S. strongly dedicated towards transit investments, funding agencies like the U.S. Department of Transit, whose Beyond Traffic discussion document has stressed this kind of prioritization, are more likely to want to partner with them (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2015). In terms of the McCarran-to-MGM project specifically, to measure the success of this transit investment over time and to create opportunities for policy-tweaks to its operation, rigorous measurements will have to be taken. In particular, mode-share and vehicle miles travelled will be crucial metrics through which to judge whether or not the implementation of the Monorail will have been effective. Because so many of the trips in Las Vegas are made by tourists, localising the modal data to taxis and ride-sharing services will also yield a clearer sense of the Monorail’s impact.
3.2.4 Conclusion Fundamentally, the RTC’s plan, despite its length and time-span, feels incomplete. It still lacks some fundamental questioning of the forces which have gotten the region to its currently untenable position. To achieve its stated goals around mode-shift, increasing air quality, and increasing the overall efficiency of the transportation system, the city will have to directly confront the growth patterns that have brought its transportation system to its current lumbering state. Overall, we believe that the region needs to strongly consider: rigorous urban containment regulations, greater incentivization or supply-side management of private automotive transportation (particularly with reference to air quality), and to either consider a long-term reorientation of the financial mechanisms for transportation towards sustainable modes, or to create a structure for seeking more and greater partnerships to build sustainable transportation infrastructure.
21 | Metrics: Measuring Las Vegas Valley’s Sustainable Transportation Future
CONCLUSIONS AND MOVING FORWARD TO 2020 The Clark County Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035 sets a positive direction for an otherwise deeply challenged region. Our consulting team was tasked with evaluating the progress of the plan’s ambitious goals towards a sustainable economically viable transportation future for all Clark County residents and visitors. We utilized our experience from Vancouver to help shape policy directions that will help achieve the overarching goals of the program. Our emphasis was to tease out clearly what each of the goals means and how their success will be known through metrics and indicators. For each of the goals, we tried to incorporate metrics which, both qualitatively and quantitatively, speak to the economic, ecological, and social health of the region. We have used some examples from cycling infrastructure and public transit to demonstrate the effectiveness of synthesized goals and metrics in implementation for effective change. We are looking forward to further developing recommendations for the upcoming Clark County Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035 and seeing the community further progress towards being a more sustainable, just, and healthy place.
References | 22
Acevedo, W., Gaydos, L., Tilley, J., Mladinich, C., Buchanan, J., Blauer, S., … Schubert, J. (2013, August). Urban Land Use Change in the Las Vegas Valley. Retrieved April 11, 2016, from http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/anthropogenic/population/las_vegas/ Bernhard, B. J., Green, M. S., & Lucas, A. F. (2008). From Maverick to Mafia to MBA Gaming Industry Leadership in Las Vegas from 1931 through 2007. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 49(2), 177–190. British Columbia Air Quality. (n.d.) Air Pollution and Greenhouse Gases from Different Commuting Options. Retrieved on April 11th, 2016, from: http://www.bcairquality.ca/topics/emissions-transportation-options.html Boheman, H. D. V., & Janssen Va De Laak, W. H. (2003). The Influence of Road Infrastructure and Traffic on Soil, Water, and Air Quality. Environmental Management, 31(1), 50–68. Cerne, A. (2008). The Significance of Regional Planning. Revija Za Geografijo, 1(3), 25–35. Clark County. (n.d.). History of Land Use Planning in Clark County. Retrieved March 30, 2016, from http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/parks/Documents/centennial/history/history-comprehensive- planning.pdf Daniels, T., & Lapping, M. (2005). Land Preservation: An Essential Ingredient in Smart Growth. Journal of Planning Literature, 19(3), 316–329. Google Maps. (2016, February 18). Las Vegas Map. https://www.google.ca/maps/dir///@36.1246738,-115.4551869,10z
Retrieved
February
18,
2016,
from
Kraler, K. (2016). The Generic Spectacle: the Normalization of Neoliberal Development on the Las Vegas Strip. University of Waterloo, Waterloo. Littlejohn, D. (1999). Real Las Vegas, The: Life Beyond the Strip. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pelley, J. (2004). Is Smart Growth Better for Water Quality? Environmental Science & Technology, 38(19), 365A–366A. Roosa, S. (2003). Environmental Factors Influencing Urban Sustainability Las Vegas, Nevada, Venice, Italy. Strategic Planning for Energy and the Environment, 22(3), 51–79. RTC. (2012). Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035 (pp. 1 – 162). Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada. Retrieved from http://www.rtcsnv.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Final_RTP-2013-35-Redetermination-0214131.pdf RTC. (2016). Bike Brochure. Retrieved February 18, http://www.rtcsnv.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/BikeMapBrochureSept2011.pdf
2016,
from
Smart Growth Online. (2015). What is Smart Growth. Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowth.org/what- is-smartgrowth/ Snel, A. (2013, September 9). Las Vegas becoming a bike town as Interbike approaches. Review Journal. Las Vegas. Retrieved from http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/las-vegas-becoming-bike-town-interbike-approaches Sohn, J. (n.d.). The Impact of the Smart Growth Incentive Policies on the Water and Sewer Infrastructure Investment in and Outside the Priority Funding Area in Maryland. Journal of Korean Geographical Society, 43(5), 743–760. Sonora Institute. (2010). Growth and Sustainability in the Las Vegas Valley. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from http://www.sonoraninstitute.org/component/docman/doc_view/1393-growth- and-sustainability- in-the- lasvegas-valley- 01152010.html Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition. (2015). Southern Nevada Strong Regional Plan. Las Vegas. US
Census. (2015). QuickFacts, Clark County, Nevada. http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/chart/PST045214/32003
U.S. Department of Transportation. (2015). Beyond Traffic, Trends https://www.transportation.gov/BeyondTraffic
Retrieved and
April
Choices
11,
2045.
2016,
from
Retrieved
from
Venturi, R., Brown, D. S., & Izenour, S. (1977). Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form (Revised Edition). Cambridge: MIT Press. Title Page Photo Credit: http://wallpapershome.com/nature/clouds/las-vegas-the-valley-of-fire-state-park-road-clouds-830.html