Learning Vegas' monorail lesson

The continuing woes of Las Vegas' monorail system might offer L.A. some lessons. The system handles only a fraction of the riders that backers estimated it would. Now there's word that at least one consultant raised warning flags as far back as 2000 about overestimating ridership:

A draft analysis prepared in 2000 predicted the Las Vegas Monorail would carry about as many riders as it does today -- far fewer than those touted by the original planners. The report was prepared by Wendell Cox, an Illinois-based consultant hired by monorail foes to counter the claims of its backers, four years before the monorail’s first paying passenger hopped on board. Back then, planners expected more than 54,000 riders per day, projections that Cox’s report called "among the most aggressive in U.S. transit history and could emerge as the least accurate." Cox noted that the Las Vegas Monorail was "projected to carry more passengers per route mile than the New York subway, the London Underground and the Stockholm Metro, and more than double that of the most heavily used new rail systems in the United States." "It is not likely that such an intensity of ridership would be attracted," Cox wrote. (AP)

Comments

[Richard H]

More good stuff on the LV Monorail:

http://www.fromtheheartland.org/?p=502

Thomas Rubin's comments on the impending bankruptcy of the LV Monorail are exceptional:

http://www.fromtheheartland.org/?p=504

[Jay Jay]

The LV Monorail - financed with $650 million in state industrial development bonds was never intended as public transit - the company stockholders - several major hotel properties had a cheap way to link their hotels to the Convention Center - and that is all it does. Hence stations are only accessible via rat-trails through the hotels. It was never intended for the general public.

- but all Nevada taxpayers are on the hoof to pay for it if the company can't. Why pay $7.00 a ride when for 2-3 people a taxi is cheaper? Why run it to the airport when it doesn't serve the Strip. ..but just a few hotels? It's another Las Vegas flim-flam - and not public transit. Why did Nevada politicians approve this mess? Read the piece in Bloomberg a few weeks ago.

[Marcotico]

The biggest problem with the monorail is that it doesn't connect with the airport. And after my last visit I realize why, there are a number of companies making $6-$8 per person shuttling people back and forth to their hotels.

[Richard H]

To quote:

"Cox noted that the Las Vegas Monorail was "projected to carry more passengers per route mile than the New York subway, the London Underground and the Stockholm Metro, and more than double that of the most heavily used new rail systems in the United States." "It is not likely that such an intensity of ridership would be attracted," Cox wrote."

Actually at approx. 5,000 passengers per day per route mile (20,000 per day divided by 4 miles), the Las Vegas Monorail does compare favorably to most other urban rail lines in the United States. It carries more passengers per route mile than the LACMTA Blue, Green or Gold lines. Only the LACMTA Red Line carries more per mile per day.

The Las Vegas Monorail is going broke because there is no public transit agency to subsidize it (i.e. taxpayer "support") as there is for virtually every other urban rail system in the United States and no big corporate sugar daddy to absorb the operating losses like the Disney Corporation probably does for its monorails. That doesn't mean a corporate sugar daddy might not come along for the Las Vegas Monorail. There are enough deep pockets in Las Vegas. I doubt CAT, the local public transit agency, is interested in assuming ownership of the Monorail. CAT already has the Strip Bus Route. Why should it want to ruin it's balance sheet by assuming the burden of the $600 million debt and the operating losses of the Monorail?

"Analysis of the Proposed Las Vegas LLC Monorail" 6 June 2000, the report Wendell Cox wrote, can be found on the web here:
( http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-lvmono-0006.pdf )

[Tiki]

It is beyond me why the city developers didn't run the monorail down the middle of Las Vegas boulevard - where all of the traffic is! I've ridden the LV monorail more than a few times and its a pleasant ride in and of itself but just getting to it is a huge inconvenience. I don't know why anyone wandering up and down the Strip would want to hike all the way back behind the hotels to catch a monorail (or any other mode of transport, for that matter).

C'mon Las Vegas! You should have put the transportation where people can use it!! Isn't that sort of obvious? Who are the boneheads that thought a monorail placed -behind- the casinos would recoup any money?

I have to say that I'm not against monorails but its stupid implementations like this that just amke them seem silly to everyone.

[Donald Stanwood]

The Las Vegas monorail may indeed have been misconceived. Part of the problem is that it travels along the back end of major Strip properties, which is completely off the radar screen of most tourists. Unfortunately, Wendell Cox is one of those old war-horses, like Peter Gordon and James Moore, who can always be counted on to disparage any form of public transportation. You might as well ask a cattle rancher what he thinks of vegetarianism.