
- •2006 Evaluation of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Area Express (max) Bus Rapid Transit Project
- •Max is one of 17 National brt Projects that make up the brt Consortium supported by fta
- •Executive Summary III max Project Fact Sheet VII
- •List of Exhibits 79
- •1.0 Introduction
- •1.1 Evaluation Overview
- •1.2 Max Evaluation Objectives
- •Max evaluation objectives
- •Figure 2-1: max system schematic map
- •2.1 Project and Corridor Description
- •2.2 Running Ways
- •Figure 2-2: More than half of max’s 7.5 mile route is an exclusive curbside bus lane
- •2.3 Stations
- •Figure 2-3: Typical max station (Jerry’s Nugget South)
- •Figure 2-4: Lake Mead station with max ticket vending machine
- •Figure 2-5: Las Vegas Downtown Transportation Center
- •2.4 Vehicles
- •2.5 Fare Collection
- •Figure 2-10: Ticket Vending Machine
- •Figure 2-11: Uniformed security officer checking for fare proof of payment using Personal Digital Assistant
- •2.6 Intelligent Transportation Systems (its)
- •2.7 Service and Operations Plans
- •2.8 Branding and Marketing
- •Figure 2-12: max marketing materials
- •Figure 2-13: Opening Day Celebration
- •3.0 System costs
- •3.1 Capital Costs
- •Table 3-1: Overview of Capital Costs associated with the max service*
- •3.2 Operating Costs
- •Vehicle Operation & Maintenance
- •Table 3-2: max Operating Costs, July 2004 to December 2005
- •4.1 Planning and Design
- •4.2 Vehicle Service, Maintenance and Operations Plan
- •Vehicle Service Plan
- •Vehicle Maintenance
- •Vehicle Operations
- •4.3 Implementation and Management of the its Elements
- •4.4 Branding and Public Acceptance of Service
- •Figure 4-2: Deuce, rtc's new double decker bus, operates on the heavily traveled Las Vegas strip.
- •Table 4-3: Importance of max features in docking the vehicle for precise stops*
- •5.1 Travel Time
- •Table 5-5: Has your travel time changed since riding max?
- •Figure 5-1: Has your travel time changed since riding max? (October 2005)
- •Table 5-6: Rate the speed of travel on max and cat
- •Table 5-7: For riders transferring from other cat/max routes, how long did you wait at the location you transferred? (October 2005)
- •Table 5-8: Rate the Wait Time at max and cat Stations
- •Table 5-9: Dwell Time Model Results
- •5.2 Reliability
- •Table 5-10: Rate the Dependability of max and cat
- •Figure 5-3: Driver Assessment of max features for route speed and reliability compared to cat
- •5.3 Identity and Image
- •Table 5-11: Passenger Rating of Vehicles and Shelters,
- •Max and cat riders
- •Table 5-12: All things considered rating of max and cat by riders of the service
- •Figure 5-4: Overall Rating of max / cat Service (October 2005)
- •Figure 5-5: Survey of cat riders, “Have you ever ridden max?”
- •Table 5-13: Overall rating of max service by cat riders and cat service by max riders
- •Figure 5-6: Survey of cat riders, “Do you prefer to ride cat or max?”
- •5.4 Safety and Security
- •Table 5-14: Rate the Safety of max / cat Vehicle
- •Figure 5-8: Rate the Safety of max Stations / cat Stops (October 2005)
- •5.5 Capacity
- •6.1 Ridership
- •Figure 6-1: Average Boardings per Day, max and 113, January 2004 to July 2006
- •Figure 6-3: Index of Changes in Boardings, lvbn Corridor and Systemwide
- •Table 6-1: Previous mode of max riders
- •Figure 6-4: Previous mode of max riders (October 2005)
- •Table 6-2: Rider ethnicity
- •Figure 6-5: Rider ethnicity
- •Table 6-3: Rider age
- •Figure 6-6: Rider age
- •Table 6-4: Employment status
- •Figure 6-7: Employment status
- •Table 6-5: Rider gender
- •6.2 Capital Cost Effectiveness
- •6.3 Operating Cost Efficiency
- •Figure 6-8: Intensity of Use, max compared to 113
- •Figure 6-9: max Operating Cost per Vehicle Hour
- •Figure 6-10: max Operating Cost per Boarding
- •6.4 Land Use
- •Figure 6-11: Opportunities for Redevelopment: North Las Vegas
- •6.5 Environmental Quality
- •7.1 Max is a success
- •7.2 What Works
- •Table 7-1: Calculation of Time Savings per Trip due to Dwell Time Reduction during Peak (7 am to 7 pm)
- •7.3 Summary of Lessons Learned
- •Vehicle Procurement
- •Its: Traffic Signal Priority and Queue Jumper Technology
- •Brt max Service Questionnaire
4.4 Branding and Public Acceptance of Service
As discussed, when planning and designing MAX, RTC branded the service so that it would be distinct from existing CAT services and attract a higher portion of “choice” riders. The branding exercise was successful; after one year of operations, MAX ridership increased by nearly 40 percent, from 7,000 daily riders to 9,800, and survey results show a majority of people identify MAX as providing faster and more reliable services (see Chapter 6).
As the Study Team examined the impact of the MAX brand, it became apparent that the experience with MAX has also played an important role in shaping the perception and expectation for transit service delivery. Indeed, the successful implementation of MAX on Las Vegas Boulevard is leading to expansion of the service to other parts of the RTC service area. In addition, our research suggests that experience implementing MAX has been at least partially responsible for both RTC staff’s willingness to experiment with additional innovative transit services and the community’s willingness to accept them.
Additional MAX Routes
After successfully implementing a premier rapid transit service, RTC was able to obtain the cooperation of local governments to expand the MAX service into a broader system of BRT services. The City of Las Vegas, for example, has agreed to use existing right-of-way to create a center-running exclusive busway through Downtown and on Grand Central Parkway. This new route will be branded as MAX with the same colors and look as the existing MAX. The station designs will be context-sensitive and reflect the cultural resources of the surrounding community.
In 2005, RTC released an RFP seeking to purchase 50 vehicles similar to those used on the first MAX route, to be used on in the summer of 2008 for the Boulder Highway MAX and the Downtown Connector MAX. Seven manufacturers responded to the RFP. In June 2006, RTC announced a deal with the Wright Group of Northern Ireland, UK to procure 50 StreetCar BRT vehicles, which have rail-like styling, in the manner of the CIVIS (see Figure 4-1). Unlike the CIVIS, the StreetCar does not have optical guidance. ISE Corporation of San Diego will provide hybrid diesel electric engines.
Figure 4-1: An illustration of one of the 50 new BRT vehicles to be added to the MAX fleet. This vehicle is being manufactured by the Wright Group of Northern Ireland. It will resemble the CIVIS but will not have optical guidance.
Regional Fixed Guideway
The MAX experience has also influenced other regional transportation projects. Las Vegas has been examining the potential of using BRT technology for the proposed regional fixed guideway, a 33-mile long-distance transit service bisecting the Las Vegas Valley, since 2002. During this time, the community has been considering both bus and rail technologies. After considerable debate and after MAX was successfully implemented, the RTC Board voted in April 2006 to designate rubber-tire rapid transit technology such as MAX, as the Locally Preferred Alternative for further consideration in an environmental impact statement and alternatives analysis. The Downtown Connector MAX would effectively be the first stage of the RFG.
New Transit Services and Products
RTC also launched a new double decker bus service, the “Deuce”, operating along the Las Vegas strip (see Figure 4-2). The service commenced in late October 2005 and was designed to accommodate larger volumes of passengers; up to 97 people can fit on each bus. Although the Deuce operation plan is more consistent with regular CAT service, it provides another example of the RTC implementing innovative services.