New Express Routes Coming Soon.

[Busjack]

Again, for those who still don't "believe" that some 610 trips are out of River:

Also, 6394 (a NW transit) appears to be chugging from the west on Higgins Rd (i.e. East Dundee).

[BusHunter]

Yeah 6488 was going  to river the other day. But i bet you see it go to dundee too!! 

[Busjack]

2 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

Yeah 6488 was going  to river the other day. But i bet you see it go to dundee too!! 

Probably some day, but not the other day.

[Busjack]

In another oddity, 2768, definitely a NW EZ Rider also coming in from Dundee.

[jajuan]

On 9/15/2016 at 9:11 PM, Pace831 said:

I don't believe this has been mentioned here yet:

"Most service implementations to occur December 19, 2016"

Looks like the hypothesis of wrapping the buses here is confirmed since it's stated that 13 of the 25 order express buses have been delivered and that part of the next steps is finalizing the branding of buses as part of the upcoming December 19 service improvements.

[MetroShadow]

Let's assert that Line 600 increases (midday & Saturday) may happen as early as the December Pick. Public Hearing details.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, MetroShadow said:

Let's assert that Line 600 increases (midday & Saturday) may happen as early as the December Pick. Public Hearing details.

As previously noted, it was already so noted in a board presentation and the hearing is unnecessary. Pace831's post.

[west towns]

Sounds like the hearing is real but its for service expansion  thats odd

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, west towns said:

Sounds like the hearing is real but its for service expansion  thats odd

That induced me to look up the legal requirement.

49 USC 5307 ( c)(1)(I) has the public hearing requirement:

A recipient may receive a grant in a fiscal year only if—

the recipient

(I) has a locally developed process to solicit and consider public comment before raising a fare or carrying out a major reduction of transportation;

 

I looked at the FAST Act, and while section 3004 amends 49 USC 5307. not in that regard.

Thus, I don't see why Pace is holding a hearing.

[MetroShadow]

On 10/3/2016 at 10:29 PM, Busjack said:

That induced me to look up the legal requirement.

49 USC 5307 ( c)(1)(I) has the public hearing requirement:

A recipient may receive a grant in a fiscal year only if—

the recipient

(I) has a locally developed process to solicit and consider public comment before raising a fare or carrying out a major reduction of transportation;

 

I looked at the FAST Act, and while section 3004 amends 49 USC 5307. not in that regard.

Thus, I don't see why Pace is holding a hearing.

Would you guys believe that it would be a Title VI/ Service Standards concern and not the FAST act?

Nine times out of ten, if you have a drastic change of service (say more than 25%) that would trigger a public hearing to ensure you're within bounds of public outreach and Title VI. This also includes an increase of service (in this case 600's revenue hours will see an increase of about 16 hours to the existing 8-ish). 

[Pace831]

7 minutes ago, MetroShadow said:

Would you guys believe that it would be a Title VI/ Service Standards concern and not the FAST act?

Nine times out of ten, if you have a drastic change of service (say more than 25%) that would trigger a public hearing to ensure you're within bounds of public outreach and Title VI. This also includes an increase of service (in this case 600's revenue hours will see an increase of about 16 hours to the existing 8-ish). 

I thought of that, but the changes to 600 are all additional service. Current riders of the route will not be impacted. If someone took issue with some aspect of the new service, they could have mentioned that at the hearings for the overall I-90 project.

You could possibly argue that the >25% standard applies to the hearing for 511, since the proposed <2 minutes of additional travel time could potentially make 1 of the route's 4 riders late for work, but it's still a stretch to say you need a public hearing for that change.

[Busjack]

32 minutes ago, MetroShadow said:

Would you guys believe that it would be a Title VI/ Service Standards concern and not the FAST act?

Nine times out of ten, if you have a drastic change of service (say more than 25%) that would trigger a public hearing to ensure you're within bounds of public outreach and Title VI. This also includes an increase of service (in this case 600's revenue hours will see an increase of about 16 hours to the existing 8-ish). 

 

19 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

I thought of that, but the changes to 600 are all additional service. Current riders of the route will not be impacted. If someone took issue with some aspect of the new service, they could have mentioned that at the hearings for the overall I-90 project.

You could possibly argue that the >25% standard applies to the hearing for 511, since the proposed <2 minutes of additional travel time could potentially make 1 of the route's 4 riders late for work, but it's still a stretch to say you need a public hearing for that change.

In that Pace announced that it had to update the Title VI guidelines, and 5307 says that the TA has to have procedures for public comment, possible, but as Pace831 points out highly nonsensical in this instance. It would be one thing if Pace had to cut Route 352 to pay for this, but it is CMAQ money.

I also agree with Pace831 to the extent that adding one stop on a route served by a community vehicle can't have much effect on minorities, but diverge from him to the extent that these kind of routes are scheduled to coordinate with employers and train schedules.

The only thing I can divine relative to the Title VI policy is that all those extra diesel buses might pollute some minority area near DesPlaines, but, again, 511 can't have that effect.

[MetroShadow]

2 hours ago, Pace831 said:

I thought of that, but the changes to 600 are all additional service. Current riders of the route will not be impacted. If someone took issue with some aspect of the new service, they could have mentioned that at the hearings for the overall I-90 project.

You could possibly argue that the >25% standard applies to the hearing for 511, since the proposed <2 minutes of additional travel time could potentially make 1 of the route's 4 riders late for work, but it's still a stretch to say you need a public hearing for that change.

However, the increase in additional service is still a substantial increase, mainly with revenue hours (in context of the 600). I forgot the distances of the extension of the 511, but that's still serving a new area with a potential increase in ridership (one can hope). While that could very well not follow an increase in revenue hours, revenue miles on the other hand may trigger it. Still, it's an increase  

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

 

In that Pace announced that it had to update the Title VI guidelines, and 5307 says that the TA has to have procedures for public comment, possible, but as Pace831 points out highly nonsensical in this instance. It would be one thing if Pace had to cut Route 352 to pay for this, but it is CMAQ money.

I also agree with Pace831 to the extent that adding one stop on a route served by a community vehicle can't have much effect on minorities, but diverge from him to the extent that these kind of routes are scheduled to coordinate with employers and train schedules.

The only thing I can divine relative to the Title VI policy is that all those extra diesel buses might pollute some minority area near DesPlaines, but, again, 511 can't have that effect.

Check the bulletin attached to the FTA requirement that specifies the need for a public hearing. CMAQ money is still fed money and you'd still have to be in bounds of public outreach to do it. 

[Busjack]

36 minutes ago, MetroShadow said:

However, the increase in additional service is still a substantial increase, mainly with revenue hours (in context of the 600). I forgot the distances of the extension of the 511, but that's still serving a new area with a potential increase in ridership (one can hope).

Basically, though, who is going to complain? I only brought up 352 to demonstrate that minorities are not going to suffer because people in Schaumburg are going to get better service. Makes no sense to hold a hearing in an empty hall, unless Al Larson has nothing  better to do.

[MetroShadow]

According to the 2017 proposed Budget Book (several places, but I'll cite Page 87) is that a new BoS between Toyota Park and downtown will be starting soon (the document says October, but...)

[Pace831]

3 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

According to the 2017 proposed Budget Book (several places, but I'll cite Page 87) is that a new BoS between Toyota Park and downtown will be starting soon (the document says October, but...)

Might explain why a highway bus was seen on Webwatch at SW.

[west towns]

It could happen.  Its only the 13th.  October has a few more weeks to launch.  Maybe oct 31st which is a monday makes it. A creepy ride on Halloween 

[Busjack]

15 hours ago, west towns said:

It could happen.  Its only the 13th.  October has a few more weeks to launch.  Maybe oct 31st which is a monday makes it. A creepy ride on Halloween 

I have to agree with you, given how many times it was stated in the budget. Probably also depends if the Toyota Park TC is about ready to go.

This somewhat hits me as Pace trying to compete with the Orange Line, but since what this seems to serve is in the suburbs and on the periphery of the service area for the Orange Line, probably not.

[MetroShadow]

15 hours ago, Busjack said:

I have to agree with you, given how many times it was stated in the budget. Probably also depends if the Toyota Park TC is about ready to go.

This somewhat hits me as Pace trying to compete with the Orange Line, but since what this seems to serve is in the suburbs and on the periphery of the service area for the Orange Line, probably not.

I think the commute time for the Southwest Suburbs to Downtown my be a pain in the butt (especially with the travel into Midway). I would assert that a direct-via-Harlem method would be more helpful into freeing up Midway Parking and utilizing the TC as a viable hub. 

And the Budget sounds like it's ready (they had most of the components installed or in-progress last I checked).

[MetroShadow]

Leave it to Google to get info on 856.

[Busjack]

33 minutes ago, MetroShadow said:

Leave it to Google to get info on 856.

As the article states, there actually is a pacebus.com page for it. Links don't work yet. Does say effective date is 10/24 (next Monday).

I'm a bit surprised by the premium fare.

As it implied that Toyota Park owns the parking spaces, I wonder if there is a plan to clear the lot of commuters if an event is planned.

 

[MetroShadow]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

As the article states, there actually is a pacebus.com page for it. Links don't work yet. Does say effective date is 10/24 (next Monday).

I'm a bit surprised by the premium fare.

As it implied that Toyota Park owns the parking spaces, I wonder if there is a plan to clear the lot of commuters if an event is planned.

 

I suppose two things:

(1) BoS express services are treated differently than the 877/888 or 600 series routes. Any service into downtown Chicago is/has/always(?) treated with a premium charge. 856 is approached the same way, just the end point is closer to "home."

(2) Have there been any concern of morning/afternoon trips (before 7pm) conflicting with games and the like? The Fire's (abysmal) season is over; and I wouldn't anticipate demand issues with parking in the short and medium term. 

[Pace831]

The schedule (from the article) mentions an 11 AM inbound trip, and 12:15 and 9 PM outbound trips. Seems they're looking to serve other markets than traditional rush hour commuters.

The two rush hour trips are 30 minutes apart, so at least two buses are needed. Since this is BoS, they will need to be wrapped. I wonder if SW has a 2nd highway coach in addition to the one sighted on WebWatch, or if the 2nd bus will be a transit.

[Busjack]

48 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

The schedule (from the article) mentions an 11 AM inbound trip, and 12:15 and 9 PM outbound trips. Seems they're looking to serve other markets than traditional rush hour commuters.

The 850/851/855 schedule has a combo trip starting eastbound from Plainfield at about 10:00 and outbound trips at 11:57 and 1:47. So, whatever midday market is perceived already exists.

[Pace831]

7 minutes ago, Busjack said:

The 850/851/855 schedule has a combo trip starting eastbound from Plainfield at about 10:00 and outbound trips at 11:57 and 1:47. So, whatever midday market is perceived already exists.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying the market already exists. All I was pointing out is that Pace apparently recognized that. 850/851/855 started as rush hour routes, then expanded as ridership grew to include midday and evening service. It's not unusual to have an outbound trip around noon for people leaving work early, but the 11 AM inbound and 9 PM outbound trips seem geared toward the recreational travel market. The 9 PM one is especially interesting, since the last 850/851/855 combo leaves at 7:10 PM.