JL wrote on December 14, 2008 12:25 PM: "That is why the RTC is planning more of the MAX type bus lines...light rail feel for a bus prices, and each-to-change routing."

Ha-ha, can't stop laughing. Buses that feel like light rail?? You are kidding, right? Buses are a joke. They move at the speed of snails, causing delays not only for the passengers that use the bus but for drivers on the same street. The cause such congestion, especially on streets like Tropicana where there are no bus lanes or cut outs for bus stops. This has to be a joke? There is really no difference between a MAX bus and a standard bus except in the type of fuel used.

In order for me to compute to work, using the RTC's ridiculously complicated trip planning system, I would have to leave my home at 5:30am and the trip would nearly 2 hours. To travel 18 miles. A 30 minute drive in traffic. No one in their right mind, who had the means, would commute in this city by bus.

We need light rail. It can be done as is shown in L.A. and Phoenix.

roadfro wrote on November 30, 2008 12:17 PM: *to adamv: The problem with light rail in Las Vegas is that there needs to be highly concentrated transportation oriented developments to make the light rail line viable. Las Vegas is way too spread out and doesn't have the planning densities to make a light rail line work. That is why the RTC is planning more of the MAX type bus lines...light rail feel for a bus price, and easy-to-change routing.

*to Free Nevada Meat Tokens: A Maglev project was proposed to run between southern California and Las Vegas, roughly along the I-15 corridor. The California-Nevada Super Speed Train Commission is still looking at doing something like that, and they may be moving into environmental study phases. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California-Nevada_Interstate_Maglev ) A routing of Laughlin, etc. won't generate enough daily traffic to make the project viable.

*to Kirk Peel: By definition, a legal crosswalk connects all corners of every intersection unless specifically signed for no crossing. Pavement markings do not have to be on the ground to establish a legal crosswalk. Most school bus stops are at intersections, so that's mostly a non-issue. In some cases, a marked crosswalk can be more dangerous because it can give the pedestrian a false sense of security (there is some research being conducted on this within the traffic engineering community).

Lana Chenko-Haddad wrote on November 25, 2008 01:01 AM: Yea! Finally Las Vegas is getting with the program and moving forward with Ivanpah - kudos for those with foresight!

Kirk Peel wrote on November 24, 2008 09:16 AM: The Road Warrior Lets Down School Children!
Driving down many Clark County streets in one case Horizon Ridge, I noted that there are very few safety crosswalks. When a school bus lets off our up and coming leaders many have to cross the street to get to their homes but I see no crosswalks for those on the other side of the street. I understand the school bus puts out its “Stop” signs but if there is a median in the road cars do not have to stop going the other direction. In one case I measured 1.4 miles to the nearest crosswalk, that’s 1.4 in each direction or 2.8 miles to legally cross the street. What about when children want to go to their friends’ house. This could be a 3 plus mile hike just to visit friends across the street. What is the Department of Transportation plan on doing about this problem? Who is responsible when these folks get hit by a car or government vehicle?
Regards,
Kirk Peel
Henderson

AtLeastUGetRoads wrote on November 23, 2008 12:38 PM: Don't complain..at least you get road projects that eventually will relieve your traffic. As a frequent visitor I love your nice, open, wide streets. In Oregon we're loathe to admit we need to build roads--the "greens" have a coniption while we sit mired in gridlock.

Be happy that you're getting money to improve. We need $4 billion to build a new bridge from Oregon to Washington to replace one built in 1917. But alas, there's no money--it all must be going to Nevada.

And to adamv--from a city with Light Rail: Just because you build it doesn't mean they'll ride it. Portland was the first city to build a new LRT system in 1984. We continue to build and add line (another place for our road money to divert to) yet we still have rush-hour gridlock and traffic jams. So, light rail is NOT the only answer--roads and highways are still needed.

Send some of that $13 billion to us!!!

noplanforus wrote on November 23, 2008 09:37 AM: I just want ONE project to be completed before they tear up the rest of the roads!

I think the Orange barrels & cones on Nellis were drawn into the blueprints as part of the plan.

Why can't we work on ONE project, complete it and move to the next one?

Las Vegas only has 2 seasons, Windy & Construction.

Free Nevada Meat Tokens wrote on November 23, 2008 09:04 AM: Ivanpah Airport...galactically stupid. There is plenty of room for expansion of mcCarran and we need this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weWmTldrOyo

If they are smart, it will shoot across the Mojave Preserve (like the California Aqueduct) and then come North through Laughlin, Searchlight, swerve through Boulder and then come into mcCarran from the Henderson side, thus eliminating a lot of local projects as well. On the other end, they can route it to the abandoned terminal at Ontario Airport and then down to the 91 where it can fly along the side (where they are otherwise planning to build a parallel/91"B" freeway) to relieve congestion for commuters between Riverside and OC. All of this makes it easier to fund!

adamv wrote on November 23, 2008 07:18 AM: All that money and no plan for a real mass transit system like a light rail?

I'm sorry to inform you that most people do not use the bus if they own a car. However, many people would use a light rail given it was available.
What a shame that we have no long term plan that is in place. We are one of the few big cities without a light rail. As people are finding out, simply expanding freeways to eight lanes doesn't solve all our congestion problems there will always be bottlenecks because the original design didn't account for all these cars.

I guarantee you that in ten years we will have to build a light rail because the people will demand it since traffic will become so unmanageable, that is unless our population begins to go down significantly.

Also re: “$105.3 million …to convert North Fifth Street …eight-lane roadway”...is this necessary, eight lanes up 5th st? Originally, this was going to include the light rail up 5th st to the 215 but that was killed?