Las Vegas Transit

Last updated
Las Vegas Transit System
Overview
OwnerLas Vegas Transit System Incorporated (Private)
Locale Las Vegas, Nevada
Transit type Bus
Number of lines16 (1992)
Operation
Began operation1942 (as Vegas Transit Company)
1965
Ended operationDec 1992 (residential routes), Circa April 1993 (Strip route)
Operator(s)Las Vegas Transit System Incorporated (Private)

Las Vegas Transit, also known as Las Vegas Transit System (LVTS), was a former operator of a small private bus system in Las Vegas, Nevada, United States.

Contents

History

Overview

The Vegas Transit Company (VTC) started public transportation operations in Las Vegas on August 20, 1942 with three routes and six buses by 1943. The Tanner family (as Tanner Motor Tours of Nevada) acquired VTC, then sold the franchise in 1965 to Henry Burroughs, who rebranded it as the Las Vegas Transit System (LVTS). [1] :226 Both LVTS and Gray Line Tours of Southern Nevada (GLT) were owned by First Gray Line West of Los Angeles, California. LVTS and GLT operated out of the same yard, on Industrial Rd near Charleston Blvd. [2] Due to its lucrative Strip route, LVTS made significant profits for its owners.

LVTS operated between 1965 and approximately 1993. They were bought out by the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTCSNV) in early 1993 for $900,000. RTCSNV inaugurated its Citizens Area Transit service in December 1992, and for a time, there were technically two public transit systems in Las Vegas until LVTS faded away. After CAT took over, LVTS only competed with CAT on the busy and lucrative Route #6 "Strip" for several months before being bought out. The CAT system is now known as RTC Transit.

1960s–1970s

LVTS ran a frequent and efficient service for many years during the 1960s and 1970s when the city was small; their routes covered most of the city. At the time, they were considered a vast improvement over its predecessor, Vegas Transit Lines. In 1972, approximately 8,000 passenger trips were operated per weekday. [3] In an article written in Bus World Magazine in 1978, they were praised as a self-sufficient bus system. However, LVTS suspended service to West Las Vegas, a predominantly black neighborhood, in 1969 after a series of racial violence incidents; the NAACP sued LVTS in 1974 stating the service was racially discriminatory. [1] :226 At the time, government officials also began exploring the idea of starting a public transit system to take advantage of federal subsidies. [1] :227

In September 1974, LVTS experimented with a "grid" route system to expand coverage, replacing the former "hub and spoke" system at the insistence of the Regional Transit Commission. The new system expanded coverage to 75,000 additional riders, but the expected increase in ridership never materialized, and LVTS petitioned to return to the "hub and spoke" in January 1975. [3] They then went back to the old hub and spoke route system and enjoyed an increase in ridership, as detailed in the 1978 magazine article.

Traffic in Las Vegas. Photographed by Charles O'Rear for Documerica, 1972. LAS VEGAS STREET SCENE - NARA - 549017.jpg
Traffic in Las Vegas. Photographed by Charles O'Rear for Documerica, 1972.

As in later decades, the #6 Strip route provided the money for the other money-losing residential routes and allowed the small private transit company to turn a profit. Being a successful private bus company is an exceptional feat, as by the 1960s, virtually all transit systems in the US had been taken over by municipal governments and heavily subsidized by taxpayer dollars due to declining riderships. By 1975, LVTS was operating at breakeven or a deficit, and any expansion would have to come via public subsidy. [3]

In 1978, LVTS operated a fleet of 26 buses, with half of them less than 5 years old. During 1976–1977, ridership rose by 21.8%. However, by 1979, an external consultant concluded the system was one of the worst in the nation, and that at least 110 buses would be required to provide adequate service. [1] :226

1980s–1990s

In the early 1980s, the routes were all finally synchronized to arrive/depart at the downtown transfer center at the same time to facilitate passenger transfer, except for the more-frequently running Route #6. In order to hold fares steady, a public/private partnership was set up in 1980 where the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada would apply for federal funds for buses, and approximately 14 of the local matching funds would be provided by LVTS, with the remainder provided by RTC. In turn, RTC would lease the buses to LVTS at no cost. The first RTC-purchased buses arrived in September 1981. [4]

By the 1980s and early 1990s, the private bus system was no longer adequate and lacked both the service frequency and route coverage to accommodate the explosive growth of the Las Vegas Valley. In 1981, the State Futures Commission said that mass transit was the key issue in Clark County; a 1983 ballot proposal to fund an expansion of the system by raising sales taxes was voted down resoundingly, though. [1] :227 According to Las Vegas Review-Journal articles at the time, LVTS claimed that government subsidies were needed to expand the coverage area and increase frequency of service. They contended the existing coverage with limited residential routes was dictated by the more lucrative Route #6 "Strip", which generated enough profit to support the current system. Even with population growth exceeding 60% between 1970 and 1980, the average residential density remained under 5 people in 1 acre (0.40 ha); the bus system in Las Vegas had also acquired a reputation for serving those who could not drive: the destitute and elderly, meaning there was little incentive to expand the system into areas that would not ride the bus under any circumstances. 60% of LVTS riders were tourists, nearly all riding #6 "Strip". [5] The small coverage area made it extremely difficult for people to use the buses, and ridership was limited to those who had no means of private transportation.

In addition, even though Route #6 "Strip" was the busiest and its buses were packed with tourists, that route was operated with the oldest equipment, including the smallest 35 ft long × 96 in wide fishbowls. The air conditioning units on these older buses were frequently out of service. By contrast, some of the residential routes, with few passengers, were operated with the newest buses, which were city-owned, 40 ft long × 102 in wide, Grumman 870s and Gillig Phantoms. One reason for this was the city mandated that these newer city-owned buses, which also had handicap accessibility, run on the residential areas.[ citation needed ]

A limited expansion of coverage followed the late 1970s and early 1980s, but it was too little and too late. In fact, LVTS were voted as the worst transit system in the country during one year in the 1980s The city had outgrown the small private transit system; it was unrealistic for the city to expect a private bus company, without a taxpayer subsidy, to expand and run throughout the city based solely on its Strip revenue. LVTS were providing a public service, but they also needed to turn a profit to continue.

In 1990, the Las Vegas City Council rescinded the 48-year-old private franchise agreement in order to exert more control over public transportation services. That year, voters passed Question 10, which advised the state legislature to issue $100 million per year to fund mass transit in addition to a host of other transportation improvements, marking the start of what would become Citizens Area Transit. [1] :228–229 LVTS's general manager, Barry Perea, fought to keep LVTS in business and was strongly opposed to the formation of CAT, orchestrated by RTC chairman Bruce Woodbury after Clark County voters approved a quarter-cent sales tax increase in 1990 to fund a public transit system.

When Citizens Area Transit (CAT) started operating in November 1992, LVTS turned over all residential routes but clung onto the Route #6 "Strip" operation. The newer city-owned buses (Grumman 870s, GMC RTSs, and Gillig Phantoms) were returned and given to CAT. LVTS competed head to head with CAT on the Strip using their older buses from November 1992 until about April or May 1993, when they were bought out by the RTC for $900,000. The cash fare was $1.25 for a LVTS ride and $1 for a CAT ride at the time, indicating an effort by CAT to undercut Las Vegas Transit and speed its demise. What service remained, along with a few buses, was taken over by the affiliated Las Vegas Gray Line, which continued operating for decades afterward. Eventually taken over by Coach USA and renamed Transportation Unlimited, operation of the route finally ended in 2004, being conducted with six ex-Stockton CA RTSs at the end.

Fares

In 1971, the one-way fare was $0.50; tokens could be purchased at a discount: 20 tokens for $0.35 each, and 6 tokens for $0.40 each. Legislation was being considered (AB 311) to reduce the fare to $0.20 for senior citizens. [6] Although fares had not risen since the start of LVTS in 1965, those original fares were the most expensive in the United States.

The cash fare was first increased to $0.70 in 1976 [4] and was $0.75 by 1978 with no charge for transfers. In October 1983, the fare was raised again to $0.90 with a $0.15 charge for transfers, [4] and bumped to $0.95 in 1984. [5]

In August 1987, published fares were increased to $1 for adults, $0.50 for seniors/disabled; transfers were $0.15, good for 2 hours (no round-trips nor stopovers).

In November 1991, fares were raised to $1.25 for adults and $0.60 for seniors/disabled, transfers were held at $0.15.

Routes and operations

Structure and overview

Neon signs in downtown Las Vegas. Photographed by Charles O'Rear for Documerica, 1972. NIGHT LIGHTS - NARA - 549022.jpg
Neon signs in downtown Las Vegas. Photographed by Charles O'Rear for Documerica, 1972.

Las Vegas Transit's route structure for most of its existence used a "spoke and hub" system, similar to a wagon wheel. The "hub", where most routes met, was downtown Las Vegas. This was in contrast to most transit system, which generally use a "grid" system, as CAT currently does, or a combination of the "grid" and "spoke and hub" system. The reason LVTS used the "spoke and hub" system was simply to maximize coverage of area with the fewest buses. Instead of having a bus line run in both directions along the same street, most of LVTS routes were designed in one-way loops circling a section of the city before returning downtown. This method maximized the service area covered. Furthermore, it allowed riders to go to more places, as a rider can access most other routes via the downtown hub. However, some bus riders must circle the whole route before arriving at their destination, and in most cases, required a transfer downtown as well.

In the late 1970s, the system consisted of nine routes, numbered 1 through 10, without a Route #2. The residential routes were generally subsidized by the lucrative Route #6 "Strip/Downtown". Three of the nine routes were 24-hour routes: Route #3 "Salt Lake Hwy", #4 "Boulder Hwy", and #6 "The Strip". Routes #3, #4, and #9 had 30-minute headways and #6 "Strip" had 15-minute headways. Unfortunately, the routes were not synchronized to meet at the same time and sometimes, a rider may have had to wait up to 45 minutes for transfer to the next bus.

By the 1980s, arrivals/departures were synchronized and the headways were increased on residential routes to 60–90 minutes, with limited operating hours, from about 5:30 AM to 10:00 PM. 24-hour service was limited to Route #6. Through the 1980s, LVTS also added several new residential routes: Routes #2 "North Las Vegas", #6A "Sam's Town/Strip", #11 "Henderson", and #12 "Spring Valley". They also added a Route #13 "Strip Shuttle", which benefited mostly the tourists on the Strip, connecting to the Las Vegas Hilton and the Las Vegas Convention Center along Las Vegas Blvd South and Paradise Road. In the very late 1980s and early 1990s, they also added a Route #14 "Mall Hopper" to work the three major malls in Las Vegas at the time. In 1991, LVTS started the "Strip Express" with limited stops between downtown and several points on the Strip. These were used by both tourist and casino workers.

Suburban housing development in Las Vegas. Photographed by Charles O'Rear for Documerica, 1972. HOUSING IN LAS VEGAS - NARA - 549071.jpg
Suburban housing development in Las Vegas. Photographed by Charles O'Rear for Documerica, 1972.

LVTS was operating 16 different routes by the time they went out of business in 1992–93; almost all routes converged downtown, with the exceptions of Routes #6A, #11, #12, #13, and #14. Only three routes, #3, #4, and #6, ran in both directions along one particular street for its whole route. As a small, privately-operated bus system with a limited fleet, LVTS must be given credit for maximizing the service area provided.

Operations

After the route schedules were synchronized in the 1980s and onward, residential routes were run by two shifts of drivers, a morning and a swing shift. There were hour-long service interruptions on the residential routes three times a day: two times for meals (once during mid morning and again in early evenings), and once during mid afternoon to accommodate the shift change. This resulted in travel times of two to four hours for some Las Vegas Transit riders, if they were caught between these break times, as most routes required a transfer downtown.

After the Grumman 870 buses were delivered in 1982, when the newer handicap-accessible 870s broke down on a residential route, it was usually substituted by a RTS or old New Look fishbowl. Handicap passengers were told on their printed schedules to call ahead of time regarding availability of a handicap-accessible bus. The old buses, mostly the "fishbowls" from the 1960s to the 1970s, were relegated to Route #6 "Strip", along with the RTSs. This route ran between downtown and going as far south on Las Vegas Boulevard as the old Hacienda hotel. Although the air-conditioned RTSs were also assigned to the #6 Strip, the majority of equipment on this route were still the older fishbowl buses. By the 1980s, the air conditioning units on many of these older buses had failed, and ran with open windows on the extremely crowded route. During peak hours of the day, the #6 Strip buses were packed and often had to pass passengers waiting at the bus stops.

As newer buses from Gillig were acquired, some of the 870s were then also relegated to the busy Route #6 and they must have been a welcome relief as they usually had working air conditioners. However, the 870s were also required in some residential routes as replacement buses for broken-down Gilligs and also as second buses on some of the busier routes, such as Route #3 "Salt Lake Highway" (one of the few bidirectional routes) and Route #10 "University". These two routes required two buses during peak morning and afternoon hours. Also, Route #1 "Hyde Park" often needed an extra bus for second runs. Strangely enough,[ according to whom? ] LVTS never published a time schedule for this second run bus on the "Hyde Park" route. It just ran 30 minutes apart from the regularly scheduled bus.

LVTS also experimented with a couple of new routes in its last years of service, including the #14 "Mall Hopper", which required two air-conditioned buses. Starting in the early 1990s, LVTS also started buying a few used and new RTSs for the Route #6 "Strip", again with working air conditioners. But, even then, because of the large number of buses required to service the busy Strip route, workhorses of the Strip fleet continued to be the good old, reliable fishbowl buses, some that were over 20 years old. In fact, LVTS ran some of the oldest buses in the USA.[ citation needed ] Because of criticism from the newspapers and city about the old, non-air conditioned buses, LVTS did fix the air-conditioning on many of the old fishbowls.

Fleet and livery

From 1964 to about 1981, LVTS primarily operated the GM New Look (Fishbowl) Bus in both 35-foot (45-passenger) and 40-foot (53-passenger) lengths. Starting in 1981, LVTS began to supplement its fleet with leased buses which had been purchased by the city of Las Vegas: 5 GMC Rapid Transit Series (RTS) buses (1981); 12 Grumman/Flxible 870s (1982); and 13 Gillig Phantom 40-foot transit buses (1990). The Grumman 870s were used mostly on the residential routes. The RTSs and Grumman 870s were handicap accessible, while the older fishbowls were not. The Phantoms (also accessible) mostly replaced the Grumman 870s.

LVTS itself purchased new and used air-conditioned buses in the early 1990s to get newer equipment on the by-then seriously overcrowded Strip route, replacing some of the older GM New Look buses, whose air conditioning units were frequently broken. Six secondhand GMC RTS-01 buses were purchased in 1991 from San Jose, California; two new TMC RTS-06 buses were delivered in 1992.

In 1991, LVTS also bought four New Flyer D60HF articulated buses to run the "Strip Express" route with limited stops between downtown and several points on the Strip. LVTS also purchased five MCI MC-5C buses secondhand which had previously operated in Saudi Arabia. These MC-5Cs were designed with double roofs due to the hot Saudi desert sun, and thus, worked very well for the hot Las Vegas sun. They were designed to run on the "Strip Shuttle", which operated between the Las Vegas Hilton and the rest of the Strip hotels.

By the end of its operations, LVTS had a fleet of 45 buses, 30 of which were leased from the city.

Livery

In 1973, a New Look bus was named "Irving" and painted in multiple bright colors with a "happy face". According to General Manager Gary Ballinger, this was done to "inject a little fun into the idea of bus riding" and mark the beginning of an upgrade and expansion campaign. [7] During the mid-1970s, the livery changed from a crazy color scheme of multi-color all-over with cartoonish faces (e.g. bus fronts painted w/ lips and a tongue sticking out or grinning teeth) to a more conservative and professional livery of a belt line deep orange/orange/yellow with "Las Vegas Transit" in large letters. This more professional paint scheme lasted until the end of transit operation in the 1990s.

Roster

Las Vegas Transit bus roster
Number
(Qty)
Mfr.ModelImageDeliveredNotes
4301–4302
(2)
TMC RTS-06 CAT TMC RTS.JPG September 1992Delivered new, serial numbers NR828750 & NR828751 [8] for Strip service, later sold to Citizens Area Transit & renumbered 153-154
4401–4403
(3)
GMC RTS-04 Las Vegas Transit RTS 4402.jpg 1991Acquired used from Southwest Coaches (San Diego CA, ex-101-103, originally built 1983–84) [9] for Strip service, later sold to Citizens Area Transit & renumbered 150-152
4500–4510
(11)
GMC New Look (TDH4517) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 4512.jpg 1965Serial numbers 0502-0512, 0516. Built in 1960 [10] & acquired used for start of LVTS service in 1965 from Oklahoma City (ex-701-711, 715).
4517–4520
(4)
GMC New Look (T6H4521A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 4517.jpg 1977Serial numbers 0248-0251. Built in 1969 [11] & acquired used from Sun Valley Bus Lines (ex-401-404)
4521–4525
(5)
GMC RTS-04 Las Vegas Transit 1981 GMC RTS 4525.jpg November 1980Acquired new (Las Vegas city owned), [9] later transferred to Citizens Area Transit & renumbered 101-105
4536–4540
(5)
MCI MC-5C Las Vegas Transit MCI 4536.jpg 19912 door Highway buses bought used 1991 from Greyhound-Taseco (Saudi Arabian operations) 2021, unknown, 2060, 2094, unknown. They were used mostly on the "Strip shuttle" route, although occasionally making forays into the residential routes when the regular bus broke down.
4541–4546
(6)
GMC RTS-01 (TH8201) Las Vegas Transit GMC RTS 4546.jpg 1991Originally built Sep 1978 for Santa Clara County (ex-1002, 1012, 1031, 1037, 1039, 1058). [12] Acquired used for Strip service.
4550–4551
(2)
GMC New Look (TDH4519) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 4512.jpg November 1965Acquired new, serial number 0899-0900 for Tanner Motor Tours; [13] renumbered to 4510-4511 in 1977
4552–4553
(2)
GMC New Look (T6H4521A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 4512.jpg May 1969Acquired new, serial number 0331-0332; [11] renumbered to 4512-4513 in 1977
4554
(1)
GMC New Look (T6H4521A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 4512.jpg July 1971Acquired new, serial number 0739; [11] renumbered to 4514 in 1977
4555–4556
(2)
GMC New Look (T6H4523A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 4512.jpg July 1973Acquired new, serial number 0505-0506; [14] renumbered to 4515-4516 in 1977
4601–4612
(12)
Grumman 870 Las Vegas Transit 4605.jpg August 1982Acquired new, serial numbers CD094476-CD094487 [15] (Las Vegas city owned), later transferred to Citizens Area Transit & renumbered 254-261, 250-253
4701–4713
(13)
Gillig Phantom Las Vegas Transit 1990 Gillig Phantom 4702.jpg 1991Acquired new (Las Vegas city owned), later transferred to Citizens Area Transit & renumbered 301-313
5301–5304
(4)
GMC New Look (T6H5306A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 5301.jpg Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 5371.jpg February 1968Acquired new, serial number 0011-0014; [16] renumbered to 5371-5374 in 1977
5305
(1)
GMC New Look (T6H5306A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 5379.jpg July 1971Acquired new, serial number 0865; [16] renumbered to 5375 in 1977
5306–5307
(2)
GMC New Look (T8H5308A) LVTS 5377.JPG October 1974Acquired new, serial number 0221-0222; [17] renumbered to 5376-5377 in 1977
5308–5309
(2)
GMC New Look (T8H5308A) Las Vegas Transit GMC New Look 5378.jpg September 1976Acquired new, serial number 0449-0450; [17] renumbered to 5378-5379 in 1977
6101–6104
(4)
New Flyer D60HF

Las Vegas Transit 1991 New Flyer D60HF 6103.jpg

1991Articulated buses acquired new for "Strip Express" route, serial number 14080-083; [18] later sold to Citizens Area Transit & renumbered 500-503

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flxible</span> American manufacturer of coaches and buses from 1913 to 1996

The Flxible Co. was an American manufacturer of motorcycle sidecars, funeral cars, ambulances, intercity coaches and transit buses, based in the U.S. state of Ohio. It was founded in 1913 and closed in 1996. The company's production transitioned from highway coaches and other products to transit buses over the period 1953–1970, and during the years that followed, Flxible was one of the largest transit-bus manufacturers in North America.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unitrans</span> Public transit agency based in Davis, CA

Unitrans is the transit system which operates in and around the campus of the University of California, Davis. It takes its name from an abbreviation of the words "University Transport". Excepting several managerial and maintenance positions, Unitrans is managed and operated entirely by students of the University of California, Davis who usually work part-time while attending school. The system is well known throughout the area for its use of several distinctive ex-Transport for London double-decker buses, as well as its fleet of modern natural gas single-decks. The system has 18 weekday, 1 school-centered and 6 weekend routes. Current fares are $1.25 for the general public and included in student fees for undergraduate University attendees. Unitrans is one of a small number of transit systems in the United States to operate double deck buses in regular (non-sightseeing) service. Unitrans has one of the best safety records of any public transit system in the US.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada</span> American transit authority

The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) is a government agency and the transit authority and the transportation-planning agency for Southern Nevada. It was founded by the Nevada Legislature in 1965.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">RTC Transit</span> Bus network in Las Vegas

RTC Transit is the name of the public bus system in the Las Vegas metropolitan area of Clark County, Nevada. It is a subsidiary of the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada. While it services most of Clark County with regularly scheduled routes, most of the service is in the immediate Las Vegas Valley; outlying places such as Mesquite and Laughlin provide transit services to their residents via the Southern Nevada Transit Coalition, which uses several vehicles acquired from RTC Transit. In 2022, the system had a ridership of 46,406,800, or about 154,800 per weekday as of the third quarter of 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Deuce (transit bus service)</span>

The Deuce is a transit bus service serving the Las Vegas metropolitan area. Operated by RTC Transit, it began service on October 27, 2005. Originally The Deuce meant four things: (1) buses on the route were double decked; (2) the one-way fare was $2; (3) the route served the two primary gaming areas, the Strip and Downtown; and (4) the first batch of vehicles bought primarily for the service were assigned fleet numbers starting with "2". Although the double decker buses also serve other local routes and the price is no longer $2, the name The Deuce on the Strip is used by RTC to emphasize that the route refers to just the tourist route. In 2022, The Deuce had an annual ridership of 4,251,482. The Deuce operates 24 hours a day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Downtown Las Vegas</span> Human settlement in United States

Downtown Las Vegas is the central business district and historic center of Las Vegas, Nevada, United States. It is the original townsite, and the Downtown gaming area was the primary gambling district of Las Vegas prior to the Strip. As the urban core of the Las Vegas Valley, it features a variety of hotel and business highrises, cultural centers, historical buildings and government institutions, as well as residential and retail developments. Downtown is located in the center of the Las Vegas Valley and just north of the Las Vegas Strip, centered on Fremont Street, the Fremont Street Experience and Fremont East. The city defines the area as bounded by I-15 on the west, Washington Avenue on the north, Maryland Parkway on the east and Sahara Avenue on the south.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pittsburgh Regional Transit</span> Public transit agency in Pennsylvania, US

Pittsburgh Regional Transit is the second-largest public transit agency in Pennsylvania and the 20th-largest in the United States. The state-funded agency is based in Pittsburgh and is overseen by a CEO and a board of unpaid volunteer directors, some of whom are appointed by the county executive and approved by the county council; and one each by the majority and minority leaders by each political party. After operating as the Port Authority of Allegheny County for most of its history, the agency rebranded under its current name in June 2022. In 2022, the system had a ridership of 35,976,700.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Memphis Area Transit Authority</span>

The Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA) is the public transportation provider for Memphis, Tennessee. It is one of the largest transit providers in the state of Tennessee; MATA transports customers in the City of Memphis and parts of Shelby County on fixed-route buses, paratransit vehicles, demand-responsive service, and the MATA Trolley system. The system is managed by a seven-member policy board appointed by the mayor and approved by the Memphis City Council. In 2022, the system had a ridership of 3,204,000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DART First State</span> Delawares public transport system operator

The Delaware Transit Corporation, operating as DART First State, is the only public transportation system that operates throughout the U.S. state of Delaware. DART First State provides local and inter-county bus service throughout the state and also funds commuter rail service along SEPTA Regional Rail's Wilmington/Newark Line serving the northern part of the state. The agency also operates statewide paratransit service for people with disabilities. DART First State is a subsidiary of the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Broome County Transit</span> Public transportation in Broome County, New York

Broome County Transit, popularly branded as B.C. Transit, is the public transportation system serving Broome County, New York, which includes the city of Binghamton and surrounding communities.

The Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) is a government agency that provides public transportation for Pinellas County, Florida. The authority manages a fixed-route bus system that encompasses over 40 bus routes - including two express routes to Tampa; the Central Avenue Trolley; the Suncoast Beach Trolley; and the bus rapid transit service, the SunRunner.

The Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation, branded as IndyGo, is a public transit agency and municipal corporation of the City of Indianapolis in the U.S. state of Indiana. It operates fixed-route buses, bus rapid transit, microtransit, and paratransit services.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stanislaus Regional Transit Authority</span> Transportation in California, United States

The Stanislaus Regional Transit Authority, branded as The S, is a public transportation bus system serving Modesto, California and surrounding Stanislaus County. It was formed in 2021 from the merger of the Modesto Area Express (MAX) and Stanislaus Regional Transit (StaRT) systems. Most routes connect at the downtown Modesto Transportation Center; the Vintage Faire Mall serves as a secondary hub.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Metropolitan Area Express (Las Vegas)</span>

The Metropolitan Area Express, or MAX, was a bus rapid transit (BRT) line owned by the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada and operated by MV. MAX began operations on June 30, 2004. The area served extended between the Downtown Transportation Center and North Las Vegas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Portage Area Regional Transportation Authority</span>

The Portage Area Regional Transportation Authority, commonly referred to as PARTA, is a transit agency serving Portage County, Ohio. It is headquartered in Franklin Township just outside the Kent city limits. PARTA was formed in 1975 from an agreement between the city of Kent and Franklin Township and has since expanded to include routes over much of Portage County. It operates several local routes including circulator and suburban routes in Kent, and an interurban route connecting Ravenna, Kent, and Stow. PARTA also offers express routes including services into downtown Cleveland, Akron as well as weekday service to the rural Portage County communities of Windham, Garrettsville and Hiram. In addition, PARTA includes Kent State University's Campus Bus Service, which it acquired in 2004, and a dial-a-ride service. A proposed plan to acquire Lorain County Transit to serve better bus service in Lorain County. In 2022, the system had a ridership of 633,800.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gainesville Regional Transit System</span>

Gainesville Regional Transit System is the local area transit corporation that serves the Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida area, the University of Florida and Santa Fe College campuses. It presently serves 40 city routes, 10 campus routes, and five "Later Gator" routes. Paratransit (ADA) service is also provided to anyone with a Gainesville address.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mountain Metropolitan Transit</span>

Mountain Metropolitan Transit is the public transportation operator for the metro area of Colorado Springs, Colorado, providing service to downtown Colorado Springs and surrounding areas within city limits and to the city of Manitou Springs, Widefield and Security. It has 27 local routes. In 2022, the system had a ridership of 2,315,800, or about 12,100 per weekday as of the third quarter of 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County</span>

The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) is the public body responsible for the transportation needs throughout Reno, Sparks and Washoe County, Nevada. The RTC, founded by the Nevada Legislature in 1979, is an amalgamation of the Regional Street and Highway Commission, the Regional Transit Commission and the Washoe County Area Transportation Study Policy Committee. They provide public transportation services, street and highway construction, and transportation planning. In 2022, the system had a ridership of 4,598,700, or about 17,000 per weekday as of the third quarter of 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Transfort</span> Fort Collins, Colorado public transit operator

Transfort is the public transportation operator for Fort Collins, Colorado. The system offers 22 regular routes, with 20 of them providing all-day service Monday through Friday. Six-day intercity service is provided by the FLEX to Loveland, Berthoud, and Longmont. Additionally, five routes for transporting Colorado State University students, faculty and staff run throughout the school year. In 2022, the system provided transportation services to 1,753,800 people.

Transportation in the Las Vegas Valley including the cities of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas and Henderson is a multi-faceted system. The street system is mostly laid out in a north–south/east–west system of roads. While most residents rely on cars, there is a network of bus routes reaching some areas of the county. The Las Vegas Valley, being the one of the largest tourist destinations in the world, has a mass transportation system which favors the Las Vegas Strip.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Schumacher, Geoff (2004). "10 | Transportation: Better Late Than Never". Sun, Sin & Suburbia: An Essential History of Modern Las Vegas. Las Vegas, Nevada: Stephens Press, LLC. pp. 223–242. ISBN   1-932173-14-5 . Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  2. Public Mass Transit Options: Background Paper 81-9 (PDF) (Report). Nevada State Legislature. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  3. 1 2 3 TRW Corporation (February 1975). Transportation Control Plan Development for Clark County, Nevada (Report). United States Environmental Protection Agency. p. 4-30;9-1. Retrieved 19 February 2020.
  4. 1 2 3 Rice Center (October 1983). Alternative financing for urban transportation: state-of-the-art case analyses (Report). Department of Transportation. pp. 89–90. Retrieved 19 February 2020.
  5. 1 2 Buxton, William E. (April 1985). "Public/private support for sales tax increase to fund Las Vegas transit improvements". Public/Private Partnerships in Transit (Report). Vol. 2: Appendices. Department of Transportation. pp. 103–109. Retrieved 19 February 2020.
  6. "Minutes of the Commerce Committee, 56th Assembly" (PDF). Nevada State Legislature. March 8, 1971. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  7. "Irving's happy face brightens Vegas streets". San Bernardino Sun. August 4, 1973. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  8. "TMC RTS Production List, T80-206". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  9. 1 2 "GM RTS Production List, T8J-204". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  10. "GM TDH4517 U.S. Production list". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  11. 1 2 3 "GM T6H4521A U.S. Production List". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  12. "GM RTS Production List, TH-8201". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  13. "GM TDH4519 U.S. Production list". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  14. "GM T6H4523 A/N U.S. Production List". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  15. "Flxible 870 Production List". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  16. 1 2 "GM T6H5306A U.S. Production List". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  17. 1 2 "GM T8H5308 A/N U.S. Production List". The Ohio Museum of Transportation. Retrieved 11 February 2020.
  18. Kristopans, Andre (October 2, 2014). "Flyer and New Flyer". UtahRails.net. Retrieved 12 February 2020.