Transportation & Infrastructure - University of Nevada, Reno

In future years, Nevada will be billions 

of dollars short in road funding due in 

part to increases in inflation, increased 

use of alternative fuel vehicles, and new 

fuel efficiency standards expected to cut fuel 

consumption nearly in half after 2016. 

(Performance Analysis Division: State of Nevada 2011 

Facts and Figures, 2011, p. 15) 

Transportation 

& Infrastructure 

Transportation Access for Older Adults 

Older Adult Ridership 

Nevada’s Transportation Infrastructure 

Author: Angela D. Broadus 

Content Reviewer: Tim Mueller

TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE 

Highlights 

Mobility and transportation safety are crucial to 

the health and welfare of Nevada’s residents and 

are of utmost concern to the Nevada Department 

of Transportation (NDOT) and the Department 

of Public Safety (DPS). NDOT addresses mobility 

needs through various forms of public transportation, 

administration of the government’s Federal Transit 

Administration grants, and monitoring rural 

transit providers to ensure compliance with federal 

guidelines. In Nevada’s Strategic Highway Safety 

Plan for fiscal year 2012, the DPS also addressed 

transportation safety through the identification of 

five areas the DPS deemed crucial to the reduction of 

traffic accidents and fatalities: seat belt use, impaired 

driving, lane departures, intersection crashes and 

pedestrian safety (Nevada Department of Public 

Safety, 2011, p. 5). 

The following sections highlight transportation 

and infrastructure issues and resources particularly 

relevant to Nevada’s older adults. 

Transportation Safety 

• Age-related changes in vision, hearing, 

cognition and response time can compromise an 

individual’s ability to drive safely, resulting in the 

potential for decreased mobility and increased 

concerns about transportation safety. 


• From 2009 to 2001, total public-transportation 

ridership, including seniors, increased by almost 

14%. 

• In 2009 and 2011, Douglas County reported the 

highest level of ridership, while Storey County 

reported no use of public transportation. (Note: 

Ridership data did not provide a rationale for 

zero reported use of transportation within Storey 

County.) 

• From 2009 to 2011, ridership increased 

significantly in Washoe, Douglas and Lander 

counties and Carson City. 


• In 2011, NDOT began the second phase of the 

multi-agency study Connecting Nevada. Goals 

of this study included redefining Nevada’s 

transportation planning process through 

collaboration with federal, state, regional and 

local agencies and stakeholders, and improving 

Nevada’s transportation network for future 

generations. The study was expected to be 

completed in the first quarter of 2013 followed by 

data analysis and planning. To date, the project 

has connected with more than 150 stakeholders 

across the state. 


• Nevada has four transportation agencies that 

work to increase mobility for seniors: 

— Regional Transportation Commission of 

Washoe County 

— Regional Transportation Commission for 

Southern Nevada 

— Carson Area Metropolitan Planning 

Organization 

— Tahoe Metropolitan Planning Organization 

• Annual federal funding of approximately $8 

million allows Nevada’s public-transportation 

system to provide more than 1 million rides per 

year to seniors, people with disabilities, and the 

public. 

32

Transportation Safety 

As people age, many experience changes in 

vision, hearing, cognition and response time that 

compromise an individual’s ability to drive safely, 

resulting in the potential for decreased mobility 

and increased concerns about transportation safety 

(Staplin, Lococo, Stewart, & Decina, 1999). For 

example, in one Texas study, adults older than 65 who 

had been in an automobile accident were 1.8 times 

more likely than all adults 55-64 to have had a health 

condition or physical limitation prior to the accident 

(Griffin, 2004, p. 41). This association increased to 2.4 

times in adults 75 and older and to 3.1 times in adults 

85 and older (ibid, p. 42). In addition, after controlling 

for other factors, increases in age were associated with 

significant increases in the probability of dying from 

an automobile accident (see Figure T1). 


4 

3.5 

3 

2.5 

2 

1.5 

1 

0.5 

0 

Fig. T1: Relative Likelihood of Death in 

Automobile Accident by Age 

1.78 

2.59 

Death 

(Griffin, 2004, p. 35-36) 

To minimize the risk of unsafe drivers while meeting 

the mobility needs of older adults, it is essential 

that Nevada offers safe and reliable transportation 

alternatives. In the sections below, we first highlight 

Nevada’s general transportation infrastructure issues 

and the efforts to resolve the issues. Next, we discuss 

the availability and use of alternative modes of 

transportation for seniors. 

3.72 

65 Years and Older 




Nevada has four transportation agencies that 

increase mobility for seniors (see Table T1). In 

addition, the Nevada Department of Transportation 

(NDOT) has three regional centers, in Las Vegas, 

Reno and Elko, and six sub-district offices, in 

Las Vegas, Carson City, Elko, Ely, Tonopah and 

Winnemucca. 

Public transportation improves the quality of 

life for many Nevada seniors and individuals 

with disabilities by providing access to needed 

services, food, medical assistance, social activities 

and employment. Annual federal funding of 

approximately $8 million allows Nevada’s public 

transportation system to provide more than 1 million 

rides per year to seniors, those with disabilities, 

and the general public (see, Table T3; Performance 

Analysis Division: State of Nevada 2011 Facts and 

Figures, 2011). Between 2010 and 2011, Federal 

Transit Administration funds allowed NDOT to 

purchase 400 buses and transit vehicles, and to hire 

additional rural drivers (p. 4). This funding was 

essential to meet growing public-transportation 

needs in 60 Nevada communities and the state’s 25 

federally recognized Indian colonies. 

The Grants Management Advisory Committee for 

the Nevada Department of Health and Human 

Services conducted a statewide needs survey in May 

2012 that included items about barriers to obtaining 

public transportation. Of the 3,059 participants 

who completed the online version of the survey, 

the highest percentage of respondents (~80%) 

identified the cost of gasoline as a barrier to travel 

(Grants Management Unit, 2012, p. 20). Other 

barriers included vehicle maintenance costs, lack 

of public transportation, lack of knowledge about 

how to use public transportation, lack of funds to 

use public transportation, and not driving. Survey 

participants believed that rural communities have 

greater problems accessing transportation than do 

urban communities. For example, respondents noted 

that Ely is more than a two-hour drive from Elko or 

a four-hour drive from Reno, but Ely has no public 

transit system and only one commercial airline 

flight per week. Over 50% of residents in Humboldt 

County live in outlying areas with no access to 

public transportation. However, Elko County has 

a good public-transportation system. Finally, the 

public transportation system in Las Vegas, although 

sophisticated, is not adequate to meet the needs of 

all its residents (Grants Management Unit, 2012). 

33



Although public transportation is essential to 

meeting the growing mobility needs of Nevada’s 

seniors, obtaining accurate data on senior ridership is 

problematic. Total ridership data do not exist specific 

to the older adult population. Where data have been 

collected, the data on riders 65 and older have been 

confounded with the inclusion of individuals with 

disabilities of all ages and the general public. Other 

transportation services that receive NDOT funds (i.e., 

sub-recipients), such as senior centers and regional 

services, do not collect age-specific data, although 

their passengers are primarily from local senior 

centers. For example, Churchill County and other 

sub-recipients in Douglas, Esmeralda, Humboldt, 

Lander, Lincoln, Lyon, Mineral and Pershing counties 

might not report ridership by age alone, even though 

they regularly pick up passengers from the county 

senior centers. Also, Douglas County operates the 

BlueGo transit with Lake Tahoe tourists, and the 

senior centers in Minden and Gardnerville operate 

the DART public transit system. Rural transit in White 

Pine operates through the White Pine County Senior 

Services (M. Gardner, Personal Communication, 

August 30, 2012). 

From the available data, it appears that total ridership, 

including seniors, increased by almost 14% between 

2009 and 2011 (see Table T2). By region, ridership 

increased in the Northern Urban/Metropolitan (0.2% 

to 3.9%) and Rural/Frontier (69.2% to 74.2%) regions 

and decreased in the Southern Urban/Metropolitan 

region (30.5% to 21.9%; see Figure T2). Douglas 

County had the highest level of ridership in both 

years. Interestingly, Storey County reported no use 

(or failed to report use) of the public transportation 

system. From 2009 to 2011, ridership increased 

significantly in Washoe, Douglas and Lander, counties 

and Carson City 1 . 

Fig. T2: Transit Ridership: Year by Region 

0.2% 

30.5% 

69.2% 

3.9% 

21.9% 

2009 2011 

74.2% 

Northern Urban/Metro Southern Urban/Metro Rural/Frontier 

(M. Gardner, Personal Communication, August 30, 2012; Performance 

Analysis Division: State of Nevada 2011 Facts and Figures, 2011) 


Building our state’s transportation infrastructure 

is essential to meet the growing mobility needs of 

Nevada’s growing senior population. According 

to Senator Harry Reid, “Nevada’s transportation 

infrastructure is stretched to the limit...44% of the 

state’s roads are congested, and many state roads 

are in need of repair” (Reid-Issues, n.d., para. 1 and 

7). In 2008, the American Society of Civil Engineers 

(ASCE, 2009-2012) identified three top infrastructure 

concerns for Nevada: bridges, roads, and drinking 

water/hazardous waste (see Table T3). In this 

next section, we review current bridge and road 

infrastructure issues that highlight the barriers to 

mobility faced by Nevada seniors. 

Bridges are categorized as deficient if they have 

structural issues (poor load-carrying conditions), 

functional issues (below current design standards) or 

seismic issues [below current earthquake-resistant 

standards (Performance Analysis Division: State of 

Nevada, 2011 Facts and Figures, 2011)]. Nevada has 

1,922 public bridges. Of these, NDOT maintains 

1,092; various governmental agencies maintain 792; 

and private citizens maintain 38. In 2011, NDOT 

designated almost 15% (or 285) of the bridges as 

deficient due to structural (18), functional (139), 

and seismic (128) problems (Nevada State Highway 

Preservation Report, 2011, page 39). 

34 

1 

Ridership data does not include the metropolitan transit services operating in Las Vegas, Reno and Carson City.

NDOT also is responsible for 20% of Nevada’s 

roads with over half of all vehicle miles traveled on 

NDOT-maintained roads. In 2007 and 2009, ASCE 

graded the U.S. road infrastructure with a “D” and a 

“D-” for poor-to-mediocre road conditions that cost 

Americans time and fuel and increase stress due to 

congestion. The conditions also cost motorists money 

in terms of road-induced need for auto repairs (see 

Table T3). 

In 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act allocated approximately $201 million to the 

Nevada Department of Transportation to improve 

the state’s transportation infrastructure and put 

Nevada residents back to work (NDOT: Projects and 

Programs, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

Overview, 2012). Approximately 30% of the money 

was allocated for transportation projects in the urban 

areas of the state (e.g., Clark and Washoe counties); 

3.5% was allocated to rural areas; and the remaining 

money was earmarked for other statewide projects. 

The 2011 Urban Mobility Report suggested that 

demand for new road construction and infrastructure 

repair in Las Vegas outstripped supplies by 30% 

(Schrank, Lomax, & Eisele, p. 50). In addition, in a 

review of 101 U.S. cities, Las Vegas ranked 36th in 

terms of traffic congestion. This resulted in 28 hours 

of delay per commuter annually, seven gallons of 

excess fuel per auto per year, and an estimated $532 

total annual cost per auto (Schrank, et al., 2011). 

These congestion figures translate into a total annual 

congestion cost of $530 million in Nevada when the 

excess fuel costs are taken into account and delays 

are valued at $16 per hour for individuals and $88 per 

hour for large commercial trucks. 

In 2011, NDOT embarked on the second phase of 

the two-part, multi-agency study called Connecting 

Nevada. A goal of this study was to redefine 

Nevada’s transportation-planning process through 

collaboration with federal, state, regional and local 

agencies and stakeholders. Another goal was to 

improve Nevada’s transportation network for seniors 

and future generations. 

Tasks of the study included increasing public and 

stakeholder involvement in planning for Nevada’s 

future transportation needs through formal needs 

analysis and group discussion, and development of 

a statewide travel-demand model, population and 

employment forecasts, and web map. The study 

was expected to be completed in the first quarter 

of 2013 followed by data analysis and planning. At 

the time of the publication of Elders Count Nevada 

(2013), the project had connected with more than 150 

stakeholders across the state. For more information, 

please see www.connectingnevada.org. 


35


Table T1 

Nevada Transportation Agencies 

• Regional Transportation Commission Washoe County (RTC Washoe) 

• Regional Transportation Commission for Southern Nevada (RTC) 

• Carson Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) 

• Tahoe Metropolitan Planning Organization (TMPO) 

(NDOT-Personal Communication, 2012) 

Table T2 

Transit Ridership by County: Statewide Small Urban and Rural Transportation 2009 & 2011 

County Total Rides** Percent of Total 

2009 2011 2009 2011 

Carson City 1,257 4,094 0.1% 0.3% 

Churchill 44,795 36,970 3.6% 2.6% 

Clark 378,829 309,357 30.5% 21.9% 

Douglas 604,363 869,241 48.7% 61.6% 

Elko 96,726 50,412 7.8% 3.6% 

Esmeralda 7,742 6,957 0.6% 0.5% 

Eureka 2,991 0 0.2% 0.0% 

Humboldt 12,582 12,641 1.0% 0.9% 

Lander 1,490 2,962 0.1% 0.2% 

Lincoln 2,164 2,523 0.2% 0.2% 

Lyon 33,614 25,566 2.7% 1.8% 

Mineral 6,476 7,283 0.5% 0.5% 

Nye 21,685 18,512 1.7% 1.3% 

Pershing 11,254 6,638 0.9% 0.5% 

Storey 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 

Washoe 1,750 51,289 0.1% 3.6% 

White Pine 13,394 7,493 1.1% 0.5% 

Total 1,241,112 1,411,938 100.0% 100.0% 

Northern Urban/Metro 3,007 55,383 0.2% 3.9% 

Southern Urban/Metro 378,829 309,357 30.5% 21.9% 

Rural/Frontier 859,276 1,047,198 69.2% 74.2% 

**Includes adults over age 65, disabled adults, and the general public 

(http://www.nevadadot.com/uploadedFiles/NDOT/About_NDOT/NDOT_Divisions/Planning/Performance_Analysis/Fact%20Book%202011%20 

Final(1).pdf, p. 48; M. Gardner, Personal Communication, August 30, 2012) 

36

Table T3 

ASCE: Key Infrastructure Facts 

Bridges: 

• Sixteen percent of Nevada’s bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. 

• There are 165 high hazard dams in Nevada...whose failure would cause a loss of life and significant 

property damage. 

• Twenty-seven of Nevada’s 744 dams are in need of rehabilitation to meet applicable state dam safety 

standards. 

• Thirty-five percent of high hazard dams in Nevada have no emergency action plan (EAP). An EAP 

is a predetermined plan of action to be taken including roles, responsibilities and procedures for 

surveillance, notification and evacuation to reduce the potential for loss of life and property damage in 

an area affected by a failure or mis-operation of a dam. 

Roads: 

• Vehicle travel on Nevada’s highways increased 117% from 1990 to 2007. 

• Thirteen percent of Nevada’s roads are in poor or mediocre condition. 

• Fifty-nine percent of Nevada’s major urban highways are congested. 

• Nevada’s transportation department has identified 10 mega projects costing an estimated $4.8 billion 

that need to be completed by 2015 to avoid gridlock in urban areas. 

(ASCE, 2009-2012, para. #1, http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/state-page/nevada) 


37

Transportation & Infrastructure - University of Nevada, Reno

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?