COVER STORY, JUNE 2005

LIVING LAS VEGAS
Transportation-land use integration is the lynchpin to Las Vegas’ growth through 2035.
Jeremy Aguero

Aguero

With this growth come challenges, the majority of which many city councils or regional boards would give their eye teeth for. These issues have been well-documented by the Clark County Growth Task Force. The Growth Task Force was an assemblage of 17 citizens representing the population at-large and a diverse array of special interests who met for 1 year to discuss the challenges of growth. A recapitulation of the group’s 700-page report in this article would be futile (see www.growthtaskforce.com for the report and related data); however, the seemingly omnipresent theme of “integrated transportation” is worth highlighting.

At the outset, it is worth noting that Las Vegas is among the most efficient users of transportation infrastructure in the nation. The region is included in the “large metro area” subset of communities analyzed in the Texas Transportation Institute’s Annual Urban Mobility Report. According to data reported in the most recent release, Las Vegas accounts for only 59 percent of the comparable community average for daily freeway miles traveled per capita (5.8 miles compared to 9.4 miles), only 56 percent of the comparable community average for daily principal arterial miles traveled per capita (2.9 miles compared to 5.2 miles), only 62 percent of the daily system centerline miles traveled per capita and more than 120 percent of the comparable community average for transit trips per capita. In turn, localities and regional governments require fewer miles of roads, streets and freeways.

How can this be? While there are several contributing factors, density is the single greatest causal contributor. The Las Vegas metro area has a population density more than twice that of other large metro areas (4,600 persons per square mile as compared to 2,210 persons per square mile). A number of reports have quite erroneously categorized Southern Nevada as among the most sprawling metro areas in the nation. An oft-cited statistic, typically presented as evidence of sprawl, is that between 1960 and 1990 the urban population in the United States increased by 50 percent while the amount of developed land more than doubled. Compare this to the growth pattern of the Las Vegas metro area. Between 1970 and 2003 (the period for which data are available), Las Vegas’ population increased by 480 percent while the amount of developed land increased by only 260 percent. Stated differently, the region’s developed area per capita actually decreased by 38 percent. Remarkably, between 1982 and 1997 only 16 communities nationally reported increased development densities – the Las Vegas metro area was number 1 among them.

Increased density may lead to more efficient use of transportation infrastructure, but it also leads to increased traffic congestion. Total annual hours of delay in Las Vegas are only 75 percent of the comparable community average (15 hours versus 20 hours), but have increased three fold during the past 20 years, and congestion travel as a percentage of peak vehicle miles traveled are more than 110 percent of comparable community averages (they have also nearly tripled during the past two decades). Las Vegans travel relatively fewer miles, but experience longer drive times. By many accounts, this issue is becoming increasingly acute.

The Growth Task Force realized that density is a double-edged sword. Interestingly, however, the group highlighted but deferred the question of increasing the inventory of land available for future development while providing several manifestations of assent to increase density as a core growth management strategy. These included, without limitation, the promotion of mixed-use development, infill strategies and transit-oriented development integration.  This approach clearly comports with the market realities that include, again, without limitation, a 149-percent increase in the per-acre price of vacant land during 2004, a less than 10-year inventory of developable property under the limitations of the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan and the announcement of more than 100 mid- and high-rise residential community towers (nearly 40,000 units) during the past 18 months. Las Vegas is going vertical and the emergence of a new endangered species, the homeowner (housing prices have also increased nearly 50 percent during the past 12 months), only adds to the political pressure to increase densities.

Nationwide, existing low-density development has been shown to make high-capacity transit systems economically unattractive and fiscally unsound. There is substantial evidence, however, that increased densities incent mass transit ridership, and the Las Vegas area’s comparably high base densities and very high future development programming create a unique opportunity. By the close of 2010 the region will exceed 5,000 people per square mile, which places it in the upper echelon of urbanized areas nationally. At these densities, existing and planned street and highway infrastructure will be increasingly unable to accommodate the movement of workers from the suburbs to the large employment centers within the central gaming-business district. The result is two shifts: 1) jobs moving to more suburban areas and 2) residential communities developing within the central gaming-business district. Unfortunately, the price of housing within the urban core is prohibitive (averaging in excess of $400,000 per unit) and the availability of municipal services demanded by working-class populations is all but absent in these areas. The majority of urban core residential is likely absorbed by non-resident consumers (i.e., resort residential), and the exodus of jobs, particularly professional and businesses services jobs to suburban areas, is highly likely. 

Unlike other areas, the Las Vegas area’s density is emergent and less concentrated in the central business district (e.g., less than 20 percent of the region’s employment is concentrated on the Las Vegas Strip). These conditions provide fertile ground for the aforementioned employment location shift. Additionally, the necessity of multi-modal transportation strategies can be integrated into developing communities as opposed to being retrofitted to older, built-out areas (although this will obviously occur to some extent).

Transit in the Las Vegas region will not reflect the traditional transit model of moving workers from the suburbs to a single, central business district. This has been proven cost prohibitive and illusory in terms of benefits and acceptance. Rather, the twenty-first century model that will be employed in Las Vegas is one of integrated close-proximity mobility, improving the jobs-housing balance in more outlying areas and developing highly-integrated community business and residential nodes. If the area’s present intensity and pattern of development continue, the most critical issue facing investors, employers and developers will be accessibility. Those that have it will be considerably more desirable and, in turn, yield significantly higher returns. Those that do not, will have a greater ability to shelter taxable income from other investments.     

Jeremy Aguero is a principal with Applied Analysis, a Nevada-based advisory service firm providing a wide range of consultation services — including urban economic consulting, market analysis, and hospitality industry and gaming consulting —  for public and private entities.

©2005 France Publications, Inc. Duplication or reproduction of this article not permitted without authorization from France Publications, Inc. For information on reprints of this article contact Barbara Sherer at (630) 554-6054.