investment strategy - rtc

Investment Strategy Meets Objectives: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, & 5.6

R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N P L A N 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 3 0 77

This chapter starts by considering the investment strategies that address congestion management and mobility. It then looks at how these work alongside capacity expansion in the various parts of the Valley. The chapter concludes with project lists and maps that define the regional strategic investments included in the RTP.

It must be noted that the regionally significant investments are supported be a whole range of other investments in the local roadway system that are important to local movement and provide es-sential connections for accessing major roads and highways.

The Local SystemThe Las Vegas region is fortunate in having a strong local commitment to transportation funding which, while it falls short of what is needed, it is able to support considerable improvement to the local transportation network.

These local investments include improvements to the local street network funded under the Clark County Gas Tax. This gas tax is supplemented by funding under the High-Speed Lane-Mile program established under the 2002 “Question 10” Sales Tax initiative. The priority with these funds is to complete the basic grid system to a standard four- or six-lane roadway configuration.

These tax-based funds are supplemented by a very substantial investment of private developer funding for the completion of the basic street net-work as an adjunct to residential and commercial development.

Total investment in these locally funded street improvements over the RTP period is expected to be around $ 2.3 billion. Locally funded projects are listed in the overall Transportation Capital Pro-gram as set out in Appendix 1.

System Maintenance In the discussion of maintenance needs in Chapter 3, it was noted that the system is mostly in good repair and that current revenues are adequate to enable NDOT and the local jurisdictions to keep pace with maintenance needs. There are places where it is evident that roadways will need major repairs or even reconstruction. Wherever possible, this is being folded into other projects that are planned. An example of this is I-15 north. NDOT recognized several years ago that the older part of this road north of downtown was deteriorating and would need to be rebuilt. Recognizing that the road also needed widening, NDOT decided to give high priority to a project that would both reconstruct the roadway and add badly needed capacity. Similarly it is intended to undertake ma-jor reconstuction of parts of I-15 south and I-515 as part of future expansion plans identified in the RTP.

Two major bridge projects are similarly justified by the need to replace old and deteriorating facilities and to add capacity. The Hoover Dam bypass ad-dresses maintenance issues as well capacity limita-tions and security concerns on the old, winding route across the dam itself. In the south of Clark County, the Davis Dam road was closed, again for a mix of maintenance and security reasons, and a funding for a new river crossing is identified in the RTP. Apart from these routes, bridge maintenance is not a major issue in the area, although the need to provide adequately for infrequent but serious flash flooding is a significant issue in the design of many projects. This is not so much a mainte-nance issue as it is a question of design, with the potential for emergency reconstruction if existing structures fail under extreme conditions.

Most other major routes are still fairly new and therefore specific maintenance activities have not been identified. If unanticipated problems emerge, the RTC, NDOT, and the local agencies will work to adjust priorities accordingly. In some cases, such as the Las Vegas Beltway program, long-term funding is not being fully committed to capital improvements in recognition of the poten-tial need to allocate additional funding to mainte-nance needs.

5 Investment Strategy

78 R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N C O M M I S S I O N O F S O U T H E R N N E V A D A78 R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N C O M M I S S I O N O F S O U T H E R N N E V A D A

As discussed in the next chapter, routine mainte-nance is generally funded through specific sources or as definded set-asides within other programs. These commitments and set-asides have been allowed for in determining how much funding is available to support the capital improvement program.

Managing Congestion – The Freeway and Arterial System of Transportation (FAST) SystemThe most effective way of increasing the capacity of the system in congested areas is through the optimization of traffic signals. FAST will continue to develop and improve the technology of signal timing and other ITS operations on the estab-lished arterial roadway system.

Figure 5-1 : FAST Projects

Major investment in the FAST system will focus on the regional freeway network, supplemented by the interconnection of signals on major arterial streets. In addition, NDOT will maintain its com-mitment to freeway operations management and the “Motorist Assist” freeway service patrol.

The first major investment in FAST technology has been on I-15 through the resort corridor. The inter-state FAST system is being extended along US 95 north to the beltway and on I-15 north to Craig Rd, now under construction. The next priorities for the FAST program are:

w I-215 and Lake Mead Pkwy from Green Valley Pkwy. to Boulder Hwy.

w Rancho Dr. from Sahara Ave. to Rainbow Blvd.

w Durango Dr. from CC 215 to Desert Inn Rd.

w Tropicana Ave. from Rainbow Blvd. to Las Vegas Blvd.

w I-515 from I-215 to Charleston Blvd.

FAST infrastructure may also be installed as part of other funded roadway improvements, such as those on the CC 215 Beltway. Longer term priori-ties for the FAST program include:

w I-15 from St. Rose Pkwy. to I-215

w US 93 from Boulder City to I-515

w I-15 from the California State Line to St. Rose Pkwy.

w US 95 from Durango Dr. to Kyle Canyon Rd.

w I-15 from Craig Rd. to Apex

These projects are consistent with the available funding but longer term projects are included in the plan in general terms rather than as specific line items. This allows for flexibility in subsequent prioritization and project development.

Investments in these corridors include new or up-graded fiber optic communications, traffic moni-toring cameras, dynamic message signs, ramp metering at selected locations, and electronic vehicle counting. FAST also plans an expansion in the coverage of traffic monitoring cameras on the (See Figure 5-1.)

R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N P L A N 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 3 0 79R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N P L A N 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 3 0 79

Managing Congestion – Carpool Lanes, Park and Ride, and Express TransitCarpool lanes, park and ride lots, and express transit services are important tools to encourage drivers to carpool or use transit, by providing a faster, more reliable alternative to being slowed down and inconvenienced by worsening congestion.

NDOT has developed a Regional High-Occupancy Vehicle Lane (HOV) Plan which provides a frame-work for the development of a long-term region-wide system of carpool and managed lanes. This Regional HOV Plan is included for information as one of the supporting documents for the RTP. Many elements of this system are to be built as part of funded roadway projects. RTC is support-ing this system with a network of Park and ride lots. (See Figure 5-2) RTC also promotes carpool-ing and corporate vanpooling through its Club Ride program and other Transportation Demand Management activities. Express transit service is being planned to utilize the carpool lanes to im-prove travel times and transit reliability.

The northwest portion of the Las Vegas Valley first experienced substantial suburban growth during the 1980’s and 1990’s. Development in this portion now extends over 12 miles outward from down-town Las Vegas. A commute from the suburbs to the Las Vegas Strip via US 95 and I-15 is approxi-mately 20 miles. This corridor will see additional growth in future. These factors make US 95 an attractive corridor for carpool lanes and express transit. The first investment in carpool lanes in this region has been made as part of the recently com-pleted improvements on US 95 west of downtown Las Vegas.

The next priorities are to build upon this invest-ment to establish a carpool lane network connect-ing the northwest suburban areas to downtown Las Vegas and the northern end of the Las Vegas Strip via I-15. This network includes dedicated HOV ramps between major routes, as well as direct access ramps to allow HOV traffic to by-pass congested freeway intersections. The northwest HOV network will be supported by park and ride lots at key locations.

Funded HOV and related investments in the north-west corridor are:

w US 95 from Rainbow Blvd. to Durango Dr.

w Summerlin Pkwy.from Rampart Blvd. to US 95

w Direct HOV ramps between Summerlin Pkwy. and US 95

w Direct HOV ramps between US 95 and I-15

w HOV-only access on US 95 at Elkhorn Rd.

w HOV-only access on I-15 at Oakey Blvd.

w Park and ride lots at: US 95 and Durango Dr.

w Westcliff near Summerlin Pkwy.

w US 95/Kyle Canyon area (site to be determined)

RTC Transit is planning to introduce express transit service in the US 95 corridor after the first park and ride is open in 2009.

Figure 5-2 : Park and Ride/HOV Projects

80 R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N C O M M I S S I O N O F S O U T H E R N N E V A D A

Another corridor with high long-term potential for HOV is I-15 South. The area south of the Clark County Beltway did not develop as early on as the northwest suburbs, and much of the growth that has occurred feeds into routes such as Blue Diamond Road and the southern part of the Clark County Beltway. Current commuting distances on I-15 itself are too short for drivers or transit ve-hicles to derive much benefit from carpool lanes. In the future, that is expected to change. Carpool lanes are also envisaged as part of long-term wid-ening of I-515 between Henderson and downtown Las Vegas.

NDOT has recently committed to adding express lanes to I-15 in the Resort Corridor so that through traffic can by-pass the congested weaving seg-ments adjacent to the Strip. The Regional HOV Plan envisions that these express lanes could be converted into carpool operations as part of long term expansion of I-15.

NDOT’s Regional HOV Plan also identified long-term needs for carpool lanes along segments of the Beltway, but these are both dependent upon major road improvements for which funding can-not be identified at this time.

HOV lanes are not included in the current design for the widening of I-15 north from the Spaghetti Bowl to Craig Road. It is possible additional lanes could be added later to provide HOV facilities if demand justifies this.

Planning and site identification for park and ride facilities to serve additional transportation cor-ridors is under way. Priority locations, not all of which have sites identified, include:

w Near I-15 and Sloan Rd. (site to be determined)

w I-15 and St. Rose Pkwy.

w Las Vegas Blvd. and Bruner Ave.

w I-15 and Silverado Ranch Blvd.

w Sites to be identified along Blue Diamond Rd.

w I-15 and Speedway Blvd.

w US 93/95 in the Railroad Pass area (site to be determined)

The park and ride program is consistent with the available funding but longer term projects are in-cluded in the RTP in general terms rather than as specific line items. This allows for flexibility in sub-sequent prioritization and project development.

Additional express transit routes will be added as the HOV system is implemented and the support-ing park and rides are developed.

Making Transit Faster and More ConvenientThe long term vision of transit in the Las Vegas Valley involves overlaying the current RTC bus route grid with a complementary system of BRT and express routes. These innovations will provide faster and more reliable travel alternatives while exploiting the flexibility of transit-based systems to provide maximum accessibility, connectivity, and convenience. Short-term improvements and ser-vice revisions will be designed to move the transit system toward this long-term vision.

R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N P L A N 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 3 0 81R E G I O N A L T R A N S P O R TAT I O N P L A N 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 3 0 81

Maintaining the Transit SystemProjected resources allow for the maintenance of the existing transit system as well as limited expan-sion of service where this is a cost-effective way of meeting demand. The RTP includes several capital expenditures related to the basic transit system:

w A new transit center to serve downtown Las Vegas;

w Completion of the Sunset Maintenance Facil-ity;

w Replacement of buses as they reach the end of their service life; and

w Allowance for future rehabilitation of transit centers and maintenance facilities.

RTC has to maintain the ADA Paratransit system. With a large and growing population of retirees, the demand on this system has been increasing and is expected to increase at a faster rate in the future. To keep to federally mandated standards of service, the fleet of paratransit vans will have to be increased. The RTP includes:

w Replacement of paratransit vans as they reach the end of their service life;

w Expansion of the paratransit fleet; and

w Addition of vehicles designed to meet the special needs of the senior population.

Bus Rapid TransitRTC intends to build upon the success of its initial BRT line by adding bus lanes in several key cor-ridors and by constructing stations and other ame-nities to extend BRT in mixed traffic operations where dedicated lanes cannot be created. Funded investments include:

w Downtown Connector in Downtown Las Vegas

w Enhancements to shelters on the Las Vegas Blvd. Strip.

w BRT on Boulder Hwy., partially in dedicated lanes and partly in mixed traffic.

w Creation of dedicated lanes as part of the North 5th St. project.

w Provision of BRT stations on North 5th St. and on Las Vegas Blvd. South between SR 146 and the Strip.

Recent studies have recommended BRT in several additional corridors. Since funding is not currently identified, they are shown in the RTP as unfunded needs:

w Rancho Dr.

w Maryland Pkwy.

w Sahara Ave.

w Flamingo Rd.

w Las Vegas Blvd. South between Sloan and SR 146, as well as a loop to serve proposed devel-opments in the western part of Henderson.

Other corridors may be considered, and the RTC is currently considering the optimal balance between BRT operations and the development of the express network.


Express TransitRTC has recently decided that express transit of-fers the most practicable and cost-effective way of making transit more competitive with auto travel in the Las Vegas area. The key element for a success-ful express operation is to be able to operate in fast and uncongested right-of-way. Until the con-cept has proved itself, RTC will develop routes that can take advantage of the investment that NDOT is making in creating a regional network of carpool lanes. The first express service will be introduced in 2009 in the US 95 corridor into downtown Las Vegas.

Other services may be introduced as carpool lanes and associated park and ride lots are developed:

w Summerlin Parkway to downtown Las Vegas

w Through operations to the north end of the Las Vegas Strip via the carpool connector to I-15 and the direct access ramps at Alta Dr.

w Through operations to the City Center de-velopment and the south end of the Las Vegas Strip via the carpool connector to I-15 and the direct access ramps at Harmon Ave.

w Operations along I-15 south to the Las Vegas Strip via the direct access ramps at Hacienda Dr.

It may be that viable express service can be devel-oped on the arterial road network using a mix of dedicated lanes and operational and ITS improve-ments. However, these ideas are still being looked at and no decisions have been made at this time.

In addition to the development of express service within the valley, there is a need for improved tran-sit links between Las Vegas and some of the outly-ing communities. The RTP, in cooperation with SNTC, envisions development of express services that link the following jurisdictions:

w Laughlin and Searchlight with the Las Vegas Valley

w Mesquite and the Glendale/Logandale area with the Las Vegas Valley

Additional service between Pahrump and Las Vegas is under consideration, but is subject to funding by NDOT and/or Nye County.

Improving the Quality of the System Transit shelters/stations are important to transit customers. Recognizing existing deficiencies, RTC proposes funding for system-wide improvements, including:

w Replacement and upgrading of transit shelters,

w Improvements to passenger amenities and security,

w Upgrading adjoining sidewalks and pedestrian crosswalks, and

w Landscaping or amenity barriers as appropriate.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Modal AlternativesMany of the investments needed to improve the bicycle and pedestrian environment will be undertaken as part of local roadway projects and developments, in accordance with the principles discussed in Chapter 3.

A particular emphasis is placed on pedestrian and bicycle network improvements, access manage-ment to and from arterial roads, and improved access to transit shelters, schools, parks/trails, and neighborhood/commercial areas. Any safety planning and improvements includes emphasis on bicycle and pedestrian elements.

Some needed improvements will require supple-mental funding under local or federal programs, and these are identified in the RTP:

w Development of on-street bicycle facilities.

w Bicycle and pedestrian trail maintenance.

w Pedestrian realm improvements to be deter-mined through local inter-agency prioritization.


I-15 – A Corridor of the FutureI-15 between southern California and Salt Lake City has been designated a “Corridor of the Future” under a U.S. Department of Transporta-tion initiative to promote innovative national and regional approaches to congestion mitigation on a selected number of multi-state transportation corridors.

Among the proposals by NDOT, the RTC and their partner agencies in Southern Nevada under the Corridors of the Future initiative for I-15 are:

w Construction of express lanes through the resort corridor as a high priority relief to congestion for through traffic.

w Further development of the FAST freeway ITS and operations management system through the Las Vegas urban area.

w Inclusion of HOV / managed lanes as part of the concept for future phases of the widening of I-15 between the California state line and the Resort Corridor.

w Creation of park and ride lots along the highway both north and south of the urban core.

w Development of express commuter transit along the northern leg of I-15 between Mesquite and Las Vegas.

The Corridors of the Future initiative encourages agencies to look at new types of solutions to the problem of urban area congestion. NDOT has started to study a number of other projects and funding and policy mechanisms:

w A pilot program for roadway reconstruction and rehabilitation to find better ways of reducing the impact on traffic of needed road work.

w Upgrades to truck parking and freight transfer facilities.

w Enhanced use of ITS and related technologies.

w Studies into the applicability of tolling and pricing mechanisms.

w Studies of other private sector funding mechanisms.

The Eastern Commerce BypassNDOT is starting to study the feasibility of con-structing a commercial by-pass route to the east of the Las Vegas Valley. This proposal faces substan-tial challenges. A route within the Las Vegas Valley would run the risk of having a negative impact on established neighborhoods. A by-pass further east would impinge upon the western boundary of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and other environmentally sensitive lands.

If these challenges can be avoided or mitigated, then this concept of an eastern by-pass to the valley has great promise as a means of improv-ing inter-state commerce and reducing conflicts between commercial, tourist and residential travel within the urban area.

Regional Strategies: The Resort CorridorThe Resort Corridor is the 30-square mile area that is centered on the Las Vegas Strip and extends from downtown Las Vegas to the new resorts and commercial developments being built south of the beltway. It includes the Las Vegas Conven-tion Center, several “near-strip” resorts, McCarran International Airport, and University of Nevada, Las Vegas campus. It is also the site of where most of the severe and persistent congestion in the Las Vegas Valley exists.

Except for I-15, the scope to add new roadway ca-pacity anywhere in this area is limited by the den-sity of development and the cost of land. On I-15, there is scope to widen the road within existing right-of-way, although NDOT estimates it will cost well over $2 billion to accomplish what is needed. Even with the enhanced revenues assumed by NDOT, it will be late in the plan period before many of the projects on I-15 can be implemented.


A key element of the strategy for I-15 is the cre-ation of carpool lanes and access ramps through-out the corridor:

w Carpool lane connector with US 95 and direct access ramps at Oakey Blvd.

w I -15 Express Lanes from Russell to Sahara, to be subsequently converted into carpool lanes with direct access ramps at Harmon Ave. and Hacienda Ave.

w Carpool lanes to/from I-15 South

w Carpool lane connector with I-215

These are part of a larger program of improve-ments that includes:

w I-15 “Project Neon” widening of I-15 between Sahara and the Spaghetti Bowl; addition of collector-distributor roads and extended ramps. This includes reconstruction of the Charleston Blvd. interchange and new ramps to Alta Dr.

w Further widening of I-15 between I-215 and Sahara to approximately 14 lanes, including collector-distributor roads and braided ramps.

This latter is currently under study to determine the optimal ultimate lane configuration for I-15 in the resort corridor, including the role of adjacent roadways and the need to make provision for transit operations.

Certain associated road projects are included in the RTP; others will be added once the study is complete and funding identified.

The resort corridor contains two of the most inten-sively used routes in the RTC transit system. Over 30,000 riders a day use the “Deuce” along the Las Vegas Strip and 13,000 riders use the Maryland Pkwy RTC Transit line. RTC is constructing a BRT line through downtown Las Vegas to the Monorail terminal at Sahara Ave. RTC plans to upgrade bus shelters and to make operational improvements along the Strip. Many of the planned regional express transit routes will utilize the I-15 carpool lanes and direct connector ramps to provide ac-cess to key points along the Strip.

A study is under way into the potential for BRT service on Maryland Pkwy., but that project has yet to be defined and is currently unfunded.

The Las Vegas Monorail, which is owned and oper-ated by a private company but is open for use by the general public. It provides connections be-tween various resorts on the east side of the Strip and the Convention Center. RTC Transit intends to improve connections to the northern end on the Monorail at Sahara Ave. as part of its BRT and ex-press bus systems. The Monorail Company plans to extend the Monorail to McCarran Airport, which will provide a valuable addition to the route.

Major resorts generate high volumes of pedes-trian movement along the Strip. Clark County works with the resorts to maintain a high quality pedestrian realm. Starting in the 1990’s, pedestrian over-bridges have been built at many of the major intersections, and more are planned, often in as-sociation with new resort and hotel developments. The pedestrian realm concept is now being broad-ened in include the near Strip resorts as well.

Car parking on the Strip is free for both hotel pa-trons and employees. Meanwhile, employee park-ing is using up high-value land. The RTC recently worked with the resorts to study the feasibility of providing employee parking at selected off-Strip locations, linked to the resorts be either public transit or resort-owned shuttles. This study showed the value of the concept, but as yet the public planning process does not include any specific proposals of this nature. The RTC park and ride program may serve to meet some of these needs and RTC is looking at ways of ensuring that future express transit routes provide good access for employees working on at the Strip properties.


In addition to the I-15 projects, funded resort cor-ridor projects are:

w Grade separation of Oakey Blvd. at the UPRR

w I-215 improvements at the McCarran Airport connector interchange

w RTC Rapid Transit Downtown Connector

w LVMC Monorail extension to McCarran Airport

w A new downtown transit terminal at Bonneville and Casino Center Dr.

w Express bus system development

w New Pedestrian bridges over Las Vegas Blvd. at Sahara, Echelon, and City Center and over the UPRR in downtown Las Vegas*

w Extension of M.L. King Blvd. across I-15 to connect with Industrial Rd. and widening of Industrial south to Sahara Ave.

w Grade separation of Valley View Blvd. to the UPRR and roadway improvements to Harmon Ave. from Valley View Blvd. to UNLV*

w Grade separation of Tropicana Ave. at Dean Martin Dr. and widening from Decatur Blvd. to I-15

w Construction of Sunset Rd. across I-15

w Construction of City Pkwy. to connect Grand Central Pkwy. with I-15 at D St.*

w Transit center to serve UNLV campus (site to be determined)

This list includes some projects - marked (*) - that are not regarded as regionally significant but are included here to give a more compre-hensive overview of proposed improvements to be funded by RTC and the local entities.

Unfunded needs in the area include:

w BRT on Maryland Pkwy.

w Valley View Blvd. roadway improvements

w Roadway and/or transit improvements on east-west routes across the Strip, such as Flamingo Rd. and Sahara Ave.

Figure 5-3 displays the funded projects listed above.

Figure 5-3: Investment Strategy - Resort Corridor


Regional Strategies: US 95 and the northwestUS 95 has the first carpool lanes in the region and will see the initial development of express bus ser-vice anchored on the new park and ride facility at Durango Dr. Subsequent development of carpool lanes, park and ride and express transit is planned for Summerlin Parkway.

The creation of a carpool direct connection to I-15 and the Strip will greatly improve the convenience of the carpool lanes, resulting in higher vehicle oc-cupancy and increased use of transit.

In summary, the strategy for the northwest involves:

w Widening of US 95 between Washington and SR 157 and the extension of carpool lanes from Washington to Durango Dr.

w Widening of Summerlin Pkwy. between the Beltway and US 95 and the addition of carpool lanes from Rampart to US 95

w Carpool lane connectors between US 95 and I-15 at the Spaghetti Bowl and between Sum-merlin Pkwy. and US 95

w Direct access ramps at Elkhorn Rd.

w Park and rides with transit facilities at US 95 and Durango and at Durango and Westcliffe

w Express bus service on both US 95 and Sum-merlin Pkwy., initially to downtown and subse-quently to the Las Vegas Strip via I-15

Other plan projects in the northwest include:

w New interchange at US 95 and Horse Dr.

w Transit facility at Summerlin Town Center

A Demonstration Public- Private Partnership for US 95 and the Resort CorridorAlthough the revenue enhancements assumed by NDOT will allow all of the proposed US 95 and I-15 projects to be implemented, those revenue streams will not come available until at least 2014 and many of these projects will not get built be-fore the end of the plan period.

Therefore, NDOT is considering using US 95 and I-15 through the Resort Corridor to demonstrate the potential of public-private partnerships to help meet the challenge of funding transportation improvements.

Under this demonstration project, it is envisaged that the planned carpool lanes on US 95 and I-15 would be converted to toll facilities that would be managed as a public-private partnership. Variable pricing would be used to balance demand to the capacity of the lane(s), thus maintaining uncon-gested travel conditions. Carpool vehicles and transit services would be able to use the lane free of charge.

This concept has some legislative support and is consistent with current initiatives at the Federal level. However, both tolling and the necessary electronic fee collection technology would require changes in state law. For these reasons, NDOT has decided it would be premature to include this con-cept as part of the RTP at this time (summer 2008).

The basic infrastructure of the public-private partnership project would essentially be the same as is envisaged in the plan. However, there are differences and the whole idea is to get the projects implemented much sooner than is shown in the plan. If the necessary enabling legislation is passed, RTC will revise the RTP and its air quality conformity finding to reflect the revised operating plan and project schedule.


Regional Strategies: I-15 South - Gateway to the Las Vegas Valley I-15 between southern California and the Las Ve-gas Strip is the main route for tourists driving into the Las Vegas Area. The section of interstate from the State Line to the Beltway acts as a gateway to the entire resort and convention industry. The present roadway has three lanes in each direction. South of the urban area is adequate most week-days, but congestion routinely occurs on holidays and weekends and becomes severe on the south-bound lanes on Sunday afternoons.

As I-15 enters the urban area, residential commut-er traffic is growing rapidly as a result of develop-ment in the south part of the valley.

In response to these pressures, the RTP envis-ages a phased approach to adding capacity to the interstate and to promote commuter alternatives. Short term priorities are:

w I -15 widening from SR 160 to Tropicana Ave. including collector-distributor roads and new ramps to reduce weaving movements

w New interchange at I-15 and Cactus Ave.

w Las Vegas Blvd. South widening from St. Rose Pkwy. to Sunset Rd.

Longer term funded projects include:

w I -15 widening from the California state line to SR 160

w Reconstruction of I -15 from SR 160 to Tropi-cana Ave. and addition of carpool lanes

w FAST deployment on I-15 from the California state line to the Clark County 215 Beltway

w Several new or reconstructed interchanges

w BRT along Las Vegas Blvd. from St. Rose Pkwy. to the Strip

w Park and rides at Sloan, St. Rose Pkwy., and at Bruner

The unfunded part of the strategy includes:

w Rainbow south extension from Starr Ave. to I-15

w Overpasses across I-15 at intermediate locations


Proposed Ivanpah Airport McCarran International Airport is rapidly ap-proaching capacity, and the Clark County De-partment of Aviation is proposing to establish a supplemental airport in the Ivanapah Valley, east of I-15 a few miles north of the state line. That proposal is currently in the environmental review process under the National Environment Policy Act (NEPA), and it is hoped the airport will be operational by 2018. As part of this, it is proposed to create a new road, parallel to I-15, which would merge with the interstate near Sloan.

Funded surface transportation projects associated with the proposed airport are:

w New Ivanpah expressway

w Service interchange on I-15, primarily for airport employees

w Las Vegas Blvd. extension from Jean to the Ivanpah Airport

It is anticipated that Ivanpah Airport will use shuttles to connect the airport with high-occu-pancy service to and from the Las Vegas Strip and other areas. It is recognized that high-capacity transit service will likely be needed at some point as airport traffic grows beyond the initial phase of development. Options are under study, but no transit project is funded in the RTP.

Figure 5-4 display the funded projects listed above.

Figure 5-4: Investment Strategy - I-15 South


Rail alternatives Given the density of demand in the I-15 corridor, several studies have identified the value of estab-lishing some form of rail service in the corridor. The most innovative idea is to use this corridor as a US demonstration of magnetic levitation (Mag-lev) technology. This concept is being advocated by the California-Nevada Super Speed Train Com-mission, and would involve an entirely new, mostly elevated, route that would provide frequent high-capacity service at speeds of 300 kph (187 miles per hour) or more. The Super Speed Train Commission has received Congressional funding to initiate the NEPA environmental process.

An initial segment of such a system could serve to move airline passengers between Ivanpah Airport and the Strip, similar to the system currently in operation in Shanghai. RTC is currently studying this as one of a number of high-capacity transit options that may be needed to serve the Ivanpah airport as the number of airline passengers contin-ues to grow over the next 25 years.

Maglev offers high capacity and high performance, and would likely provide a major alternative to both road and short-haul air travel, but involves very high construction costs.

To provide an interim alternative to auto travel from southern California, RTC has looked at the potential to develop more conventional high-speed rail service by adding capacity to the exist-ing rail line between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. This could offer a practical and relatively inexpen-sive option that would provide a useful alternative to travel on I-15, particularly at times of conges-tion.

After some study, it has been concluded that the most effective way to establish the service is to purchase passenger trains and offer the host rail-roads a premium for accommodating the service that would be partially withheld, if passenger trains are delayed. Federal Railroad Administration funding is expected to be available for the equip-ment and this is reflected in the RTP:

The RTP does not include any funding for con-struction related to rail alternatives.

A private sector group, called Desert Express, is also promoting conventional high speed rail, but their idea is to create a new route, independent of the existing rail line. This would rely on private funding and would provide faster service than possible on the existing rail alignment, although slower than Maglev.

Regional Strategies: The Beltway and BeyondThe Las Vegas Beltway is being built in three stages. The first, completed in 2003, saw the con-struction of I-215 between Green Valley and the I-15, with the remainder of the beltway being built as a four-lane, at-grade divided arterial.

The second stage involves extending I-215 east to I-515 and the upgrade of the remaining segments to full freeway standards. This stage includes full directional interchanges at I-515, I-15 south, US 95 and I-15 north. This work is progressing well and is expected to be complete by 2013. The remaining elements funded in the RTP includes:

w Improvements to the I-215 interchange with the Airport Connector

w Widening of I-215 between Eastern Ave and I-15

w Widening of CC 215 between I-15 and Charleston Blvd.

w Upgrade of CC 215 to freeway between Charleston Blvd. and US 95

w New interchanges at Far Hills Ave. / Summerlin Pkwy., Lake Mead Blvd., Lone Mountain Rd. and Ann Rd.

w Upgrade of CC 215 to freeway between US 95 and I-15

w Full directional interchanges at US 95 and I-15

w New interchanges at Jones Blvd., Decatur Blvd., Aliante Pkwy., Revere St., North 5th St., Losee Rd., Pecos Rd., Lamb Blvd. and Range Rd.


The Las Vegas Beltway was designed to allow for eight to ten travel lanes. Four were built as part of the first stage and much of the road will be widened to six main lanes as part of the second stage, with auxiliary lanes and frontage roads in several places as well. The third stage of work would involve widening to the full capacity of the right-of-way, including the potential addition of carpool lanes.

Clark County is funding the completion of the second stage by bonding against proceeds from a dedicated development tax. The subsequent re-payment schedule will limit the amount of funding available for further improvements for a number of years. Although traffic on the first stage grew much faster than originally anticipated, it is not clear when and in what locations additional widen-ing will become needed.

For these reasons, further expansion of the Las Vegas Beltway is not prioritized for funding in the RTP at this time.

In the last decade, development has proceeded rapidly in areas adjacent to and beyond the Las Vegas Beltway. The road itself has become the focus for several major commercial and retail de-velopments.

One consequence of this is a potential need for more crossing points. Although, the Las Vegas Beltway includes interchanges roughly every mile, experience has shown that congestion can be relieved and accessibility improved if intermedi-ate streets can be connected across the facility. But with a few exceptions, additional overpasses across CC 215 at intermediate locations remain as unfunded needs.

One of the consequences arising from these developments is a need to improve connectivity to and from the Las Vegas Beltway.

These needs are most pressing in the southwest and northwest segments.

Beyond the Beltway – the southwestThe main concern here is the lack of high-standard connections between CC 215 and the rapidly growing residential areas north and south of SR 160 Blue Diamond Road.

A recent study recommended a number of op-tions, of which the most feasible appears to be the improvement of the Fort Apache alignment between SR 160 and the CC 215. (See Figure 5-5.)

Most of the other arterial roads in the area are being constructed to the limits of available right of way and the density of development means that it is impracticable to expand the roadways be-yond their present limits. In any event, no funding is available for any major improvements beyond those now in progress.

The RTP recognizes the connection between SR 160 and the Beltway, potentially on the Fort Apache Rd. alignment, as an unfunded need.

Until a few years ago, SR 160 was an unimproved two-lane road that was seeing a significant in-crease in traffic, with a corresponding increase in serious accidents. Widening this road has been an NDOT priority, and the RTP includes funding for the remaining sections:

w Widen SR 160 Blue Diamond Rd to 8 lanes between Decatur Blvd and Rainbow Blvd, including overpass at the UPRR

w Widen SR 160 Blue Diamond Rd / Pahrump Valley Rd to 4 lanes between Rainbow Blvd and Mountain Springs

Figure 5-5: Investment Strategy - Southwest Las Vegas Valley


Beyond the Beltway – the northwestMajor residential development is planned north of the beltway along its entire length, but it is in the northwest that growth is already occurring. The City of Las Vegas has recognized a need to provide additional capacity to serve these new residential developments and has proposed a new multi-lane facility to link the western beltway with US 95 and the extend that east to I-15.

The initial development of this road – known as the Sheep Mountain Parkway – is included in the plan:

w Construct the initial phase of Sheep Mountain Parkway between CC 215 near Ann Rd. and Fort Apache Rd.

w Construct new interchange at US 95 and Sheep Mountain Pkwy.

The proposed extension of Sheep Mountain Pkwy. east to I-15 is unfunded. The section of alignment between Fort Apache Rd. and Decatur Blvd. would cross environmentally sensitive parts of the upper Las Vegas wash. Because of potential long-term needs, RTC supports the reservation of right-of way so that the roadway could be build at such time as the demand justifies construction, funding becomes available and the environmental issues are resolved.

Regional Strategies: The North Las Vegas ValleyThe “V” shaped area between US 95 and I-15 north of Las Vegas has experienced, and is expect-ed to continue to experience, rapid residential growth. Major employment centers are emerging around US 95 and the Beltway. Future commercial and industrial land uses are proposed along I-15 in the northeast.

In addition to the beltway, several other projects will improve east-west movement across the area, including:

w Reconstruction of the Craig Rd. interchange with I-15, including widening of Craig Rd. and grade separation at the UPRR

w Widening of Cheyenne Ave. across the valley

w Widening of sections of Lake Mead Blvd.

w New overpass at Washburn Rd. across I-15

The area lacks north-south roadway capacity. I-15 is being widened to Craig Rd. but further im-provements are unfunded. Several other potential routes are discontinuous. To address the problem, the City of North Las Vegas is developing a major roadway along the North 5th St. alignment from Owens Ave. in the south all the way to the Las Vegas Beltway.


The funded part of the North 5th St. project comprises:

w Construction / widening of North 5th St. between Owens Ave. and CC 215 as an 8-lane divided roadway

w New overpass at North 5th St. across I-15

w Grade separated interchanges at North 5th and Cheyenne Ave. and Craig Rd.

Other RTP projects in the northern part of the valley include:

w BRT between downtown Las Vegas and CC 215

w New overpass at Washburn Rd., across I-15

w Restriping of Cheyenne Ave. to create 6 lanes from US 95 to Nellis Blvd.

w Widening of Lake Mead Dr. between Losee Rd. and Las Vegas Blvd.

Unfunded needs in the north of the Valley include:

w Widening of I-15 from Craig Rd. to US 93

w Addition of carpool lanes on I-15 between the resort corridor and Lamb Blvd.

w Interchange improvements at I-15 and US 93

w Additional overpasses across I-15 at intermediate locations

w Bus Rapid Transit on Rancho Dr. between downtown Las Vegas and Ann Rd.

Figure 5-6 displays the funded projects listed above.

Figure 5-6: Investment Strategy - North Las Vegas Valley


Regional Strategies: I-515 and the Southeast Las Vegas Valley I-515 is the main route into downtown from the southeast Las Vegas Valley. It carries heavy com-muter traffic in both directions during the peak hours. It is also one of the older sections of the interstate system in the region and has a sub-stan-dard horizontal and vertical alignment between I-15 and Eastern Ave. It is intended to rebuild the freeway with the following components:

w Reconstruct I-515 between Charleston Blvd. and I-15

w Widen I-515 to 10 lanes with auxiliary lanes and/or braided ramps

w Reconfigure downtown interchanges and add new interchanges at Pecos Rd. and Sahara Ave.

This is a major project and funding is not expected until after 2026. The reconstruction of the substan-dard parts of this road warrants attention sooner than this. It is hoped the downtown segment can be advanced, if funding becomes available.

Boulder Hwy. is a major transit route and RTC Transit plans to create a bus rapid transit route using side-running bus lanes between downtown and Tropicana Ave with continuing BRT operations to Henderson.

US 93 is the main approach to Las Vegas from I-40 and Arizona, and US 95 links the valley with the far south of the county. The two roads join west of Boulder City and continue into downtown as I-515.

One of the biggest recent projects in the region – and certainly the most impressive – is the construc-tion of a new bridge over the Colorado River just south of Hoover Dam. This bridge should be open in 2011 and will then provide much needed relief both to the existing road across the dam itself and to the alternate route through Laughlin.

West of this project, US 93 runs through Boulder City. The first phase of a planned by-pass will ex-tend I-515 to the junction of US 93 and US 95, but the major part of the route around Boulder City itself is currently unfunded.

I-515 itself is funded for widening from Henderson into downtown, but not until after 2026. In the short term, the other major project in this are is the widening of SR 546 Lake Mead Pkwy. between Boulder Hwy. and Lake Las Vegas.

Funded projects in the southeast include:

w Completion of the US 93 bridge across the Colorado River

w Extend I-515 over Railroad Pass to US 93/95

Widen I-515 to 10 lanes between Henderson and Charleston Blvd., including carpool lanes.

w Park and Ride in the Railroad Pass area (site to be determined)

w Widen SR 546 Lake Mead Pkwy. between Boulder Hwy. and Lake Las Vegas

Other funded projects further out include:

w A new bridge across the Colorado River in Laughlin

w Complete the widening of US 95 to 4 lanes all the way to the California state line

Unfunded needs include:

w US 93 Boulder City by-pass

Projects are shown in Figures 5-7 and 5-8.


Figure 5-8: Investment Strategy - Southeast Las Vegas Valley

Figure 5-7: Investment Strategy - Southeast Las Vegas Valley


Summary of Regional Strategic InvestmentsThe following pages list the regional strategic investments that can be funded for construc-tion between 2009 and 2030 with the resources expected to be available over that period. These comprise the Regionally Significant and Feder-ally Funded projects identified in accordance with federal regulations. (See box on page 74)

The lists give a brief description of each project, its estimated cost and the year of completion.

Appendix 1 contains additional details of funding sources and phasing of these projects.

Details of projects proposed for funding in the first four years of the plan (2009 to 2012) are set out in the accompanying Transportation Improvement Program.

The regional strategic investments are supported by many other smaller projects. These are also listed in Appendix 1. Some of the more important of these have been mentioned in the preceding discussions of specific strategies and corridors. This has been done to give the reader a fuller picture of what the RTC and its partner agencies expect to see implemented. Where such projects are locally funded and are not otherwise “region-ally significant” they do not appear in the lists on the following pages.

This section concludes with a listing of the more significant of the many unfunded needs. These are projects that are likely to be needed in response to the growth of the region but which cannot be implemented with anticipated resources.

Also included in the following pages are maps that illustrate the locations of regional strategic invest-ments. See Figures 5-9 through 5-12.

Summary of Regional Strategic Investments included in the Regional Transportation Plan

Street and Highway improvements

Project costs include all funded phases including planning, preliminary engineering (PE), right-of-way acquisition (RoW) and construction. Project costs over $5 million are rounded to the nearest million.

Items in brown include construction of carpool lanes or ramps.Items in grey involve only planning, PE and right-of-way. Some projects are not funded for construction in the RTP.

Cost in $ million in year Date in of expenditure operation

► I-15 in Southern Nevada: Corridor Study 0.2 2010

► I-15 in the Las Vegas Valley: PE and right-of-way for interchange and widening improvements 7 2012

► I-15 from the California state line to Sloan: widen to 8 lanes 200 2030

► I-15 north of Primm: Construct service interchange for Ivanpah Airport 23 (A) 2011

► I-15 at Sloan Rd.: Reconstruct interchange 116 2030

► I-15 from Sloan Rd. to SR 160: Widen to 8 lanes 240 2020

► I-15 from Sloan Rd. to SR 160: Widen to 10 lanes 80 2030

► I-15 at Bermuda Rd.: Construct interchange 117 2025

► I-15 at Starr Ave.: Construct Interchange 95 2025

► I-15 at Cactus Ave.: Construct interchange 78 2013

► I-15 at SR 160: add directional northbound ramp 45 2030

► I-15 from SR 160 to Tropicana Ave.: Add collector-distributor roads and braided ramps 273 2012

► I-15 at Sunset Rd.: Construct overpass cost included above 2012

► I-15 from SR 160 to Tropicana Ave.: Reconstruct freeway; 405 2030 and revise ramps; add carpool lanes

► I-15 from SR 160 to Tropicana Ave.: Widening includes 2 carpool lanes cost included above 2030

► I-15 at I-215: Construct carpool lane connector ramps 75 2030

► I-15 from Russell Rd. to Sahara Ave.: Widen to 10 lanes, incl 4 express lanes (♣) 2010

► I-15 from I-215 to north of Sahara Ave.: Widen to 14 lanes, plus auxiliary lanes 803 2030 and/or braided ramps

► I-15 from I-215 to north of Sahara Ave.: Widening includes carpool lanes cost included above 2030 and addition of carpool lane access ramps

► I-15 Project Neon Phase 1: Construct carpool lane direct connection between 515 2017 US 95 and I-15 and carpool ramps at Oakey Blvd./Wyoming Ave.

► I-15 Project Neon Phase 3: Reconstruct SB lanes, including braided ramps 180 2025

► I-15 Project Neon Phase 4: Reconstruct NB lanes, including braided ramps 385 2030

► I-15 at Charleston Blvd: Reconstruct interchange cost included above 2030

► I-15 from I-515/US 95 to Craig Rd.: widen to 8/10 lanes 7 (♥) 2012

► I-15 from Craig Rd. to Speedway Blvd.: PE for roadway widening 1.0 2011

► I-15 at US 93:: PE for upgrade of interchange 0.7 2011► I-15 at MP.108: PE for construction of an interchange 7 2011 to serve new Mesquite airport

► I-15 at MP.118 Pioneer Blvd. extension: PE for construction of an interchange 4.6 2011► I-215 from Windmill Ln. to I-15: Widen freeway and upgrade at Airport Interchange 181 2011

► I-215 from Eastern Ave. to Windmill Ln.: Widen freeway 33 2013► I-215 from I-15 to west of Decatur Blvd.: Widen freeway (♣) 2009

► I-515 from College Dr. to Charleston Blvd.: Widen freeway to 10 lanes 1790 2030


► I-515 from College Dr. to Charleston Blvd.: Widening includes 2 carpool lanes cost included above 2030

► I-515 at Sahara Ave.: Construct interchange cost included above 2030

► I-515 at Galleria Dr.: Construct interchange 62 2011

► I-515 from Charleston Blvd. to I-15: Reconstruct and widen freeway 1394 2030 to 10 lanes; reconfigure downtown ramps

► I-515 from Charleston Blvd. to I-15: Widening includes 2 carpool lanes cost included above 2030

► I-515 at Pecos Rd., F St.: Construct interchanges cost included above 2030

► US 93 Hoover Dam by-pass: Surfacing, signing and guardrails 15 (♥) 2011

► US 93 Boulder City by-pass from Hoover Dam by-pass to I-515 at 28 2012 Foothills: PE for new freeway

► US 93/US 95 from US 95 interchange to I-515 at Foothills: Construct 4-lane freeway 237 2020

► US 95 from the California state line to SR 163: Widen to 4-lane divided highway 5 2012

► US 95 from Rainbow Blvd. to Ann Rd.: Widen to 8 lanes plus auxiliary lanes 156 2012

► US 95 from Rainbow Blvd. to Ann Rd.: Widening includes 2 carpool lanes cost included above 2012

► US 95 at Rancho Dr./ Ann Rd.: Construct braided ramps cost included above 2013

► US 95 from Ann Rd. to SR 157: Widen to 6/8 lanes, plus auxiliary lanes (*) 274 2030

► US 95 from Ann Rd. to Durango Dr.: Widening includes 2 carpool lanes cost included above 2025

► US 95 at Elkhorn Rd.: Construct carpool lane connector ramps 33 2020

► US 95 at Horse Dr.: Construct interchange 42 (♥) 2010

► US 95 at SR 157 Kyle Canyon Rd.: Construct interchange 37 2017

► SR 146 St. Rose Pkwy. from I-15 to I-215: Complete widening to 8 lanes (♣) 2009

► SR 160 Blue Diamond Rd. from Decatur Blvd. to Rainbow Blvd.: Widen to 8 lanes (♣) 2010

► SR 160 from Rainbow Blvd. to Durango Dr.: Widen to 4 lanes 4 (♥) 2011

► SR 160 from Durango Dr. to SR 159: Widen to 4 lanes 13 (♥) 2012

► SR 160 Pahrump Valley Rd. from SR 159.to Mountain Springs: Widen to 4 lanes 108 2013

► SR 564 Lake Mead Pkwy. from Boulder Hwy. to Lake Las Vegas: Widen to 6 lanes 41 2012

► SR 573 Craig Rd. from Berg St. to Pecos Rd.: Widen to 6 lanes and construct 21 (♥) 2010 overpass at UPRR

► SR 573 Craig Rd. at I-15: Reconstruct interchange (♣) 2010

► CC 215: PE for beltway interchanges 1.1 2011

► CC 215 at Summerlin Pkwy. / Far Hills Ave.: Construct interchange 128 2010

► CC 215 Western Beltway from Craig Rd. to Hualapai Way: Complete upgrade 134 2012 to 6-lane freeway

► CC 215 at Lone Mountain Rd., Ann Rd.: Construct interchanges cost included above 2012

► CC 215 Northern Beltway from Hualapai Way to Tenaya Way: Widen 228 2013 to 6 lanes and construct system interchange at US 95

► CC 215 from Tenaya Way to east of Decatur Blvd.: Complete upgrade to freeway 150 2011

► CC 215 at Jones Blvd., Decatur Blvd.: Construct interchanges cost included above 2012

► CC 215 at Aliante Pkwy.: Construct interchange (♣) 2009

► CC 215 from east of Decatur Blvd. to east of North 5th St: 116 2011 Complete upgrade to freeway

► CC 215 at Revere St., North 5th St.: Construct interchanges cost included above 2011

► CC 215 from east of North 5th St.: to Range Rd.: Complete upgrade to freeway 119 2012

► CC 215 at Losee Rd., Pecos Rd., Lamb Blvd., Range Rd.: Construct interchanges cost included above 2012

► CC 215 at I-15: Construct system interchange 119 2013

► Bonneville Ave./Clark Ave. from Main St. to Charleston Blvd:Construct one-way couplet (♠) 2010

► Cheyenne Ave. from Rancho Dr. to Pecos Rd.: Widen to 6 lanes 13 2010

Continued on next page


► Ivanpah Expressway from Ivanpah Airport to I-15 south of Sloan: 353 (A) 2018 Construct 4-lane expressway with interchange at I-15 south South of Sloan

► Kyle Canyon Rd.: Replace bridge at FH.11 3.1 2011

► Lake Mead Blvd. from Losee Rd. to Las Vegas Blvd.: Widen to 5 lanes 16 2020

► Las Vegas Blvd. from Ivanpah Airport to Jean: Construct 2-lane road 4.9 (A) 2012

► Las Vegas Blvd. from SR 146 to Sunset Rd.: Widen to 6 lanes (#) 6 2011

► Laughlin: Construct new 4-lane bridge across the Colorado River 64 2012

► Martin Luther King Blvd. from Industrial Rd. south of Oakey to north of Alta: 750 2030 Construct 6-lane roadway overpass across I-15

► North 5th St. from Owens Ave. to Cheyenne Ave.: Construct 8-lane road 117 2013 with bridge over I-15 (#)

► North 5th St. at Cheyenne Ave.: Construct interchange cost included above 2013

► North 5th St. from Cheyenne Ave. to Craig Rd.: Construct 8-lane road (#) 75 2020

► North 5th St. at Craig Rd.: Construct interchange 30 2020

► North 5th St. from Craig Rd. to CC 215: Construct 8-lane road (#) 65 2020

► Northshore Rd. / Echo Bay Access (Lake Mead NRA): Rehabilitate road 27 2012

► Oakey Blvd. / Wyoming Ave.: Construct grade separation at UPRR 78 2018

► Rainbow Blvd. from CC 215 to Tropicana Ave.: Widen to 6 lanes 3.6 2013

► Sheep Mtn Pkwy. from CC 215 south of Ann Rd. to US 95: Construct 4-lane road 80 2030

► Sheep Mtn Pkwy. at CC 215 south of Ann Rd. and at US 95: Construct interchanges 103 2030

► Sheep Mtn Pkwy. from Fort Apache Rd. to I-15 (N): BLM reservation 0 2011 to safeguard right-of-way

► Summerlin Pkwy. from CC 215 to US 95: Widen to 8 lanes 50 2015

► Summerlin Pkwy. from Rampart Blvd. to US 95: Widening includes 2 carpool lanes cost included above 2015

► Summerlin Pkwy. at US 95: Construct carpool lane connector 50 2015

► Tropicana Ave. from Decatur Blvd. to Polaris Ave.: Widen to 8 lanes 61 2025

► Tropicana Ave. from Polaris Ave. to I-15: Widen to 8 lanes and 108 2025 grade separate at Dean Martin Dr

► Tropicana Ave. from Swenson St. to Maryland Pkwy.: Widen to 8 lanes 9 2025

► Warm Springs Rd. from Dean Martin Dr. to Las Vegas Blvd.: 14 2025 Reconstruct as 6-lane roadway over I-15

► Washburn Ave. at I-15: Construct 4-lane overpass 39 2025

Notes to list of Street and Highway projects: (A) Funded by the Clark County Department of Aviation (#) Project includes transit facility (♠) Project includes landscaping (♣) Funded in prior years (♥) Also funded in prior years

See map on the opposite page for the location of the street and highway projects listed above. Projects that cannot be given a specific location are not shown on the map. Projects in the outlying areas of Boulder City, Laughlin, and Mesquite are shown on Figure 5-12.


Figure 5-9: RTP Projects - Street and Highway Projects


Notes to list of ITS projects: (♣) Funded in prior years

See map on the opposite page for the location of the ITS and operational improvement projects listed above. Projects that cannot be given a specific location are not shown on the map. The map shows certain projects that are consistent with the funding available (•) but have not been prioritized for inclusion in the RTP at this time. Projects in the outlying areas of Boulder City, Laughlin, and Mesquite are shown on Figure 5-12.

ITS deployment and operational improvements

Project costs over $5 million are rounded to the nearest million. For additional information and details of fund sources, see Table 2 in Appendix 1 to the RTP.


► I-215 / SR 564 from Green Valley Pkwy. to Boulder Hwy: FAST ITS deployment 4.9 2010

► I-515 from I-215 to Charleston Blvd.: FAST ITS deployment 22 2011

► US 93 in Boulder City: Intersection improvements (♣) 2011

► Cheyenne Ave at Commerce St: Signal modifications 0.3 2010

► Craig Rd from Tenaya Way to Decatur Blvd; ITS and signal improvements 0.5 2010

► Cheyenne Ave at Commerce St: Signal modifications 0.3 2010

► Craig Rd from Tenaya Way to Decatur Blvd: ITS and signal improvements 0.5 2010

► Eastern Ave from Sunridge Pkwy to Flamingo Rd: ITS and signal improvements 5 2010

► NDOT freeway service patrol and incident management 49 ongoing

► NDOT FAST system operations 125 ongoing

► North Las Vegas: Intersection improvements at Las Vegas Blvd./Civic Center Dr./Carey Ave. 1.1 2010

► Rainbow Blvd. at Sahara Ave.: Intersection improvement 5 2011

► Rainbow Blvd. from Sahara Ave. to US 95: Intersection improvements 7 2011

► Rancho Dr. from Sahara Ave. to Rainbow Blvd.: Signal interconnect 5 2010

► Durango Dr. from CC 215 to Desert Inn Rd.: Signal interconnect 1.4 2011

► Regional freeway and arterial ITS system development (•) 139 ongoing

► Regional intersection and signal improvement program 21 ongoing

► Tropicana Ave from Rainbow Blvd to Wynn Rd: ITS and signal improvements 0.2 2010


Figure 5-10: RTP Projects - ITS Projects, and Operational Improvements


Notes to list Transit project list: (M) Funded by the Las Vegas Monorail Company (♣) Funded in prior years (♥) Mainly funded in prior years

Transit capital improvements, including Park and Ride


► US 95 at Durango Dr.: Construct Park and Ride and transit facility 4 (♣) 2009

► US 95 corridor: Express transit service development 3 2009

► SR 160: from Pahrump to the Las Vegas area: Express transit service development 1.7 2012

► Bonneville Ave. and 1st St.: Construct new transit center to serve downtown Las Vegas 6(♥) 2009

► Boulder Hwy. from Henderson to downtown Las Vegas: Construct Bus Rapid Transit 72 2012

► Downtown Las Vegas - Grand Central Pkwy. to Sahara Ave.: Construct downtown (♣) 2009 connector Bus Rapid Transit

► Durango Dr. at Westcliff Dr.: Construct Park and Ride and transit facility 4 2009

► Inter-city passenger rail service: Acquisition of conventional passenger rail equipment 3 2012

► Laughlin: Construct maintenance facility for Southern Nevada Transit 1.2 (♥) 2009 Coalition operations

► Laughlin / Mesquite: Support for transit operations in Laughlin and Mesquite 4.7 2012

► Las Vegas Blvd. from SR 146 to Sunset: Construct stations and facilities 13 2015 to support Bus Rapid Transit operations

► Las Vegas Blvd. from Sunset to downtown Las Vegas: transit 0.6 2010 stop and shelter improvements

► Las Vegas Monorail from McCarran Airport to MGM Grand: Extend Monorail 450 (M) 2012

► Mesquite: Support for transit operations see “Laughlin / Mesquite” above

► North 5th St. from Owens Ave. to Craig Rd. Construct stations and facilities 13 2020 to support Bus Rapid Transit operations

► RTC Transit system: bus fleet replacement program 420 on-going

► RTC Transit system: bus rapid transit fleet expansion 60 2010

► RTC Transit system: bus rapid transit fleet replacement 106 2030

► RTC Transit system: express route development 3.6 2017

► RTC Transit system: paratransit fleet expansion 33 on-going

► RTC Transit system: paratransit fleet replacement 234 on-going

► RTC Transit system: security system upgrades 9 on-going

► RTC Transit system: enhancements 9 on-going

► RTC Transit system: system development 24 2017

► Regional coordinated human services transportation 9 2012

► Regional Park-and-Ride program 13 2015

► Silverado Ranch Blvd. at Dean Martin Dr.: Construct Park-and-Ride 1.0 2010

► Summerlin Town Center: Install shelters at transit center 0.6 2011

► Sunset Rd. at Decatur Blvd.: Construct new transit maintenance facility 10 (♥) 2009

► Transit maintenance facility rehabilitation 30 2025

► University of Nevada, Las Vegas: Construct bus transfer center 2 2011

See map on the opposite page for the location of the transit and park and ride projects listed above. Projects that cannot be given a specific location are not shown on the map. Projects in the outlying areas of Boulder City, Laughlin, and Mesquite are shown on Figure 5-12.


Figure 5-11: RTP Projects - Transit Projects and Park and Ride Projects


Notes to Alt. Mode project list: (♥) Mainly funded in prior years

Alternate mode, environmental and air quality improvements

Project costs over $5 million are rounded to the nearest million. For additional information and details of fund sources, see Table 2 in Appendix 1 to the RTP.


► I-215 at Eastern Ave.: Landscaping 0.5 2010

► US 95 from M.L.King Blvd. to Rainbow Blvd.: Landscaping 10 2010

► US.95 from M.L.King Blvd. to Rainbow Blvd.: Emissions mitigation and MSAT studies 0.7 (♥) 2010

► Bonneville Ave. / Clark Ave. from Casino Center Dr. to Las Vegas Blvd.: Landscaping 0.7 2010

► Stewart Ave. from Main St. to Maryland Pkwy.: Landscaping and roadway rehabilitation 3.4 2010

► Craig Rd. from Revere St. to North 5th St.: Median landscaping 0.6 2010

► Downtown Las Vegas: Construct pedestrian overbridge across UPRR 3.5 2010

► Downtown Las Vegas: Demonstration electric bike project 0.1 2010

► Regional bicycle facilities and pedestrian realm improvements 47 on-going

► Regional bicycle lockers 0.5 2011

► Regional transit fleet: install triple bike racks 0.2 2010

► Regional off-road diesel engine retrofit program 0.7 2011

► Regional on-street bike lane program 15 2017

► Regional Ozone emissions reduction program 24 2018

► Regional truck stop electrification program 1.3 2011

► RTC “Club Ride” Travel Demand Management program 42 on-going

► Sunset Rd. at I-515: Landscaping 0.7 2010

► University of Nevada Las Vegas: Bike lockers 0.1 2010

Totals for the Regional Strategic InvestmentsStreet and Highway improvements 11.261 billion ITS deployment and operational improvements 387 million Transit capital improvements, including Park-and-Ride 1.537 billion Alternate mode, environmental and air quality improvements 118 million

Total Regional Strategic Investments 13.303 billion


Figure 5-12: RTP Projects in Boulder City, Laughlin, and Mesquite


Summary of Regional Strategic Investments: Unfunded NeedsMany more projects are needed than can be funded under a reasonable projection of available revenues. The more important of these are listed below. Many of these are the subject of planning studies to determine the preferred scope and likely cost. Once these studies have been completed, these projects will be considered for inclusion in future updates of the Plan, subject to the availability of funding.

Costs are expressed in ranges, to give an approximate indication of the funding that may be needed. Since potential dates of implemen-tation are unknown and may vary from project to project, costs are expressed in constant, current year dollars – this is an exception to the year-of expenditure basis for all other costs in this RTP.

Unfunded needs Cost range in $million in constant 2008$

► I-15 from SR 146 to CC 215: Construct overpasses at selected cross-streets $60 to $140m ► I-15 from Craig Rd. to Speedway Blvd.: Widen to 6 lanes $105 to $140m ► I-15 from Speedway Blvd. to US 93: Widen to 6 lanes $208 to $326m► I-15 at US 93: Reconstruct interchange $40 to $75m► I-15 at MP 108: Construct interchange to serve Mesquite airport $30 to $45m► I-15 at MP 118 Pioneer Blvd.: Construct interchange $35 to $50m► I-215 from Eastern Ave. to I-15: Widen to 10 lanes, including 2 carpool lanes $125 to $200m► I-515/US 95 at I-15 (Spaghetti Bowl): Partially reconstruct interchange and to widen to 6 lanes EB $100 to $300m► US 93 Boulder City by-pass: Construct new 4-lane freeway $352 to $850m► CC 215 Southern Beltway from I-15 to Russell: Widen to 10 lanes, including carpool lanes $125 to $200m► CC 215 Southern Beltway from Decatur to Russell: Construct overpasses at selected cross-streets $40 to $105m► CC 215 Western Beltway from Russell to Charleston: Widen to 10 lanes, including carpool lanes $120 to $180m► CC 215 Western Beltway from Charleston to Sheep Mountain Pkwy.: Widen to 8 lanes, including carpool lanes $105 to $175m► CC 215 Northern Beltway from Aliante to Range: Construct overpasses at selected cross-streets $60 to $140m► SR 146 St. Rose Pkwy.: Construct grade separated interchanges at selected locations $120 to $180m► SR 546 Lake Mead Pkwy. at Boulder Hwy. & Lake Las Vegas: Construct grade separated interchanges $90 to $130m► Alexander Rd. at US.95: Widen overpass $15 to $25m► Alexander Rd. / Civic Center Dr.: Construct overpass across I-15 $15 to $40m► Eastern Transportation Corridor between I-15 near Jean and I-15 near Apex: $500m to $1.5bn Construct new truck route to by-pass the Las Vegas urban area► Flamingo Rd. from CC 215 to Boulder Hwy.: Improve traffic flow and implement transit improvements $140 to $175m► Fort Apache Rd. from SR 160 to CC 215 at Sunset Rd.: Upgrade to high standard arterial $30 to $80m► Inter-city rail service: Terminal station and other infrastructure to support re-establishment $30 to $100m of conventional high-speed rail service between Los Angeles and Las Vegas► Las Vegas Blvd. South from Sloan Rd. to SR 146: Implement Bus Rapid Transit $10 to $60m► Maryland Pkwy. from Russell to Charleston: Improve traffic flow and implement Bus Rapid Transit $25 to $125m► North 5th St. from Grand Teton Dr. to Sheep Mountain Pkwy.: Construct new roadway $10 to $30m► Pecos Rd. from Alexander to Washburn: Construct new roadway across I-15 $150 to $200m► Pecos Rd. from Grand Teton Dr. to Sheep Mountain Pkwy.: Construct new roadway $10 to $30m► Rainbow Blvd. from I-15 near Sloan Rd. to Starr Ave.: Construct new 4-lane roadway $110 to $240m► Rainbow Blvd. from Sahara Ave to US.95: Upgrade to super-arterial $60 to $150m► Rancho Dr. from US 95 to Ann Rd.: Convert to super-arterial and implement Bus Rapid Transit $150 to $300m► Sahara Ave. from CC 215 to Boulder Hwy.: Improve traffic flow and implement Bus Rapid Transit $250 to $400m► Sheep Mountain Pkwy. from Fort Apache Rd. to I-15(N): Construct 4-lane roadway and I-15 interchange $300 to $1 bn► Sheep Mountain Pkwy. from Fort Apache Rd. to I-15(N): Construct connecting roadways $40 to $80m at Jones Blvd., Revere St., Losee Rd., and Lamb Blvd.► Valley View Blvd. from Tropicana to US 95: Widen roadway and improve traffic flow $30 to $50m► West Henderson loop: Implement Bus Rapid Transit $10 to $25m► Western Ave. from Sahara Ave. to Charleston Blvd.: Widen roadway and improve traffic flow $10 to $20m


Figure 5-13: Unfunded needs


investment strategy - rtc

Documents