The Network Revitalization Initiative

[renardo870]

Good day, everyone. Has there been any discussion on when the Pace Network Revitalization Initiative meetings on the restructuring and/or restoration of the permanent discontinued Pace routes will start? I think it may start in the Spring but nothing has been stated.

[Railguy]

Posted  on Pace website bids due late April

[MetroShadow]

Chances are that the discussions won't start until Fall, maybe.

(Given that AC Transit is doing the same thing, they won't start the efforts until June late April, roughly a year after the award)

Edited April 23, 2023 by MetroShadow
https://www.actransit.org/realign

[Railguy]

Bids due this week April 26th

[Busjack]

Back to the subject: On the Aug. agenda:

[MetroShadow]

On 8/13/2023 at 7:19 AM, Busjack said:

Back to the subject: On the Aug. agenda:

Saw that. As much as I like JW and his firm's efforts (SF, VTA, Richmond), the biggest critique of their work is that often times they ignore the nuanced needs of the riding public (the 2022 Muni Service Plan was a bit of a touchy subject when faced with some tough choices), but I think this was something that Senior Staff would've/should've done eons ago. Glad that they're approaching the coverage/ridership balance that I was attempting to work with a decade ago.

[Busjack]

9 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

Saw that. As much as I like JW and his firm's efforts (SF, VTA, Richmond), the biggest critique of their work is that often times they ignore the nuanced needs of the riding public (the 2022 Muni Service Plan was a bit of a touchy subject when faced with some tough choices), but I think this was something that Senior Staff would've/should've done eons ago. Glad that they're approaching the coverage/ridership balance that I was attempting to work with a decade ago.

I'm not sure why Pace has all these consultants when it has a planing department, which, in  the context of several restructurings for which I attended workshops, the "beta version" of the plan undid most of the things the consultant suggested, due to lack of resources or political blowback. Pace has the ridership information to determine if a corridor  has the ridership to support fixed routes, and such concepts as Pulse and On Demand are used by various TAs.

[Busjack]

The Board discussion of the contract is here. Apparently called reVision, and it supersedes Driving Innovation. Press Release

[Railguy]

Driving Innovation is overall vision plan.  The restructuring is one of the innitiatives with Driving Innovation.  

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, Railguy said:

Driving Innovation is overall vision plan.  The restructuring is one of the innitiatives with Driving Innovation.  

6 of one, a half dozen of another. But if the aim of this is to restructure everything (including alternative modes), it gets the job done.

[MetroShadow]

On 8/15/2023 at 7:06 AM, Busjack said:

I'm not sure why Pace has all these consultants when it has a planing department, which, in  the context of several restructurings for which I attended workshops, the "beta version" of the plan undid most of the things the consultant suggested, due to lack of resources or political blowback. Pace has the ridership information to determine if a corridor  has the ridership to support fixed routes, and such concepts as Pulse and On Demand are used by various TAs.

If I'm a betting man, and I'm about 8 years removed, service planning does plenty as it is with putting stuff out on the street.

Then you end up and think about doing a large-scale overhaul, in which, you might end up with these grandiose ideas. And there's some of the undoing from 20 years worth of restructurings and essentially not activating some of the others (South Cook stands out because of the recession, the others currently is a lack of drivers).

It's a little easier to just let the consultants take a crack, as long as drivers and staff equally have a say in the development, but a really assertive engagement plan with the community (in which a lot of agencies have fallen short of doing, and I'm not talking about just covering bases in a Title VI checkbox).

[Busjack]

11 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

If I'm a betting man, and I'm about 8 years removed, service planning does plenty as it is with putting stuff out on the street.

Then you end up and think about doing a large-scale overhaul, in which, you might end up with these grandiose ideas. And there's some of the undoing from 20 years worth of restructurings and essentially not activating some of the others (South Cook stands out because of the recession, the others currently is a lack of drivers).

It's a little easier to just let the consultants take a crack, as long as drivers and staff equally have a say in the development, but a really assertive engagement plan with the community (in which a lot of agencies have fallen short of doing, and I'm not talking about just covering bases in a Title VI checkbox).

You have more experience than I do, but I can make these predictions:

• Only areas in Cook County that would need more fixed route service are South and West. The top 5 or so routes are already in line to become Pulse. North of Golf Road, if there is any service, it will mostly be On Demand, with a map similar to this one for RTS Monroe.
• Since they said at the hearing that the study will take 2 years, it will be hard to tell what the suburban employment situation will be, but with offices being relocated and being torn down (think Allstate, Baxter, Motorola, Sears, AT&T), those areas won't support transit.Services may be shifted to hospitals and other care facilities.
• For the most part, malls won't be transit hubs. Northbrook Court and Hawthorne certainly won't, as the current proposals are for major portions to be demolished. Old Orchard probably will continue. Golf Mill will be a hub only because the Pulse station is there, not because of the mall. Pace has already been forced out of Yorktown, River Oaks, and Orland Square (at least as layover points, with the transfer points moved off-site).
• Since Llewellyn said that the low hanging fruit will be picked first, it will be like the North Shore project, with the fairly easy swap of 208 and 213 for 205 being accomplished, but the rest running into snags, and the beta version doing away with the consultants' good ideas.
• Apparently, there is enough demand that I-55 service is increasing, but I don't know what indicator would justify bringing back I-294 service. Maybe like I-90--get a grant, put service there, and see if the riders come.

[MetroShadow]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

You have more experience than I do, but I can make these predictions:

• Only areas in Cook County that would need more fixed route service are South and West. The top 5 or so routes are already in line to become Pulse. North of Golf Road, if there is any service, it will mostly be On Demand, with a map similar to this one for RTS Monroe.
• Since they said at the hearing that the study will take 2 years, it will be hard to tell what the suburban employment situation will be, but with offices being relocated and being torn down (think Allstate, Baxter, Motorola, Sears, AT&T), those areas won't support transit.Services may be shifted to hospitals and other care facilities.
• For the most part, malls won't be transit hubs. Northbrook Court and Hawthorne certainly won't, as the current proposals are for major portions to be demolished. Old Orchard probably will continue. Golf Mill will be a hub only because the Pulse station is there, not because of the mall. Pace has already been forced out of Yorktown, River Oaks, and Orland Square (at least as layover points, with the transfer points moved off-site).
• Since Llewellyn said that the low hanging fruit will be picked first, it will be like the North Shore project, with the fairly easy swap of 208 and 213 for 205 being accomplished, but the rest running into snags, and the beta version doing away with the consultants' good ideas.
• Apparently, there is enough demand that I-55 service is increasing, but I don't know what indicator would justify bringing back I-294 service. Maybe like I-90--get a grant, put service there, and see if the riders come.

Agreed.

I think the Expressway services are still on the table but won't be tinkered with that much (use the rapid and pulse networks as a spine). The question is (for the rest of the network) how to manage through the first and the last mile (seeing how the same travel patterns haven't changed that much), and definitely moving away from the "shopping mall hub" model. 

South and Southwest definitely has the most to gain (since there are no crosstown services south of 119 that could easily be helped until RLX), but North Shore/Northwest was thrown a wrench and finishing the job would be a good idea.

[Busjack]

19 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

South and Southwest definitely has the most to gain (since there are no crosstown services south of 119 that could easily be helped until RLX), but North Shore/Northwest was thrown a wrench and finishing the job would be a good idea.

• I'm not sure what RLX is.
• I was implying deeper cuts than were indicated by the North Shore plan's second version and questioning whether On Demand would be offered as an alternative.

[Railguy]

Red Line Extention? 

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, Railguy said:

Red Line Extention? 

Thanks. That's usually RLE, which is why I got confused.s

BTW, when I said "Only areas in Cook County that would need more fixed route service are South and West," I had in mind that those are the most urbanized suburbs, it is claimed that Fair Transit brought back proportionally more riders, Halsted Pulse should go to Chicago Heights, etc., and not any rerouting for when the Red Line gets to 130th in maybe 2029.

[Railguy]

RTA's funding a study for Pace for south Halsted corridor between Harvry and Chicago Heights. It was part of  RTA 2022 community planning program.    Seems to be following similar process as the Harlem study completed a few yrars ago.

[Busjack]

11 hours ago, Railguy said:

RTA's funding a study for Pace for south Halsted corridor between Harvry and Chicago Heights. It was part of  RTA 2022 community planning program.    Seems to be following similar process as the Harlem study completed a few yrars ago.

Again, thanks. I'm not sure if I knew that or not. That does reinforce my point that potential for growth existed there independently of RLE (although I said it hypothetically).

[Busjack]

The planning portion of the Planning and Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting indicated that the best percentage recovery was in North Cook, especially on Milwaukee and Dempster, considering the sum of local and Pulse routes. Metzger also said that if NW had more capacity, they would add service to 208 and 290. They also mentioned growth on 213, but then because Pace took over from CTA between Davis and Howard.

[Tcmetro]

11 minutes ago, Busjack said:

The planning portion of the Planning and Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting indicated that the best percentage recovery was in North Cook, especially on Milwaukee and Dempster, considering the sum of local and Pulse routes. Metzger also said that if NW had more capacity, they would add service to 208 and 290. They also mentioned growth on 213, but then because Pace took over from CTA between Davis and Howard.

I was surprised to see that the 213 is a top route these days, but good service does drive ridership. I do wish that line had Sunday service though.

[Elkmn]

Does North Shore have any extra capacity for the 208/290? That would be the obvious choice if North Shore had room. Also, how logistically difficult would a Pace/CTA combined garage be? 

[Busjack]

10 minutes ago, Elkmn said:

Does North Shore have any extra capacity for the 208/290? That would be the obvious choice if North Shore had room. 

One would think, but Pace hasn't done it. Metzger was asked that and said Pace had done it, but the only time I knew of it was when North Shore opened in around 1991. She goes back at Nortran at least that far.

14 minutes ago, Elkmn said:

Also, how logistically difficult would a Pace/CTA combined garage be?

Totally impossible. CTA's garages (except maybe 77th) are all over-capacity, short of workers, and use incompatible equipment. It's a long enough deadhead to get from FG to Crawford and Central--can you imagine FG to Schaumburg? Only reason CTA has 54A, 201 and 206 is that in the last coordination plan, Pace didn't have the resources to take on anything other than the extension of 213.

[NewFlyerMCI]

20 hours ago, Elkmn said:

Also, how logistically difficult would a Pace/CTA combined garage be? 

To add on, capacity and location make converting an existing garage a very tall task, but there's also not a real advantage for a new one either. WMATA had a shared garage with Fairfax Connector for a while, and ended up pulling out after some route restructres that ceded routes to FFX + pandemic. I believe some of the Seattle agencies also do something similar, and I think that's due to Sound Transit being a joint venture between King County Metro, Community Transit & Pierce Transit. I also believe that the three agencies (happy to be wrong) that they own the Sound Transit buses and hire the drivers as well, so the "sharing" aspect is formality. Evanston is about the only area with serious overlap, but going in on a new garage to store the 20-30 buses needed to run CTA service in north shore for a not that great reduction in deadhead probably doesn't pass a CBA

[NewFlyerMCI]

20 hours ago, Busjack said:

Only reason CTA has 54A, 201 and 206 is that in the last coordination plan, Pace didn't have the resources to take on anything other than the extension of 213.

North Shore was on the list of capital projects that was supposed to receive funding from Rebuild Illinois, with an aim towards renovation and expansion, citing future (now reality) Pulse project(s) and I-94 express service, but I can't seem to find any progress beyond there now being no funding. 

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

North Shore was on the list of capital projects that was supposed to receive funding from Rebuild Illinois, with an aim towards renovation and expansion, citing future (now reality) Pulse project(s) and I-94 express service, but I can't seem to find any progress beyond there now being no funding. 

At the referenced meeting,  Metzger said capacity at NW had to be expanded 300%, but when asked about moving some buses, she said NS had to be expanded, too. However, NW and NS have not been in the last few capital budgets. The 2024 Capital Budget only has North, and the 5 year plan only has N, R, and SW. The presentation at the meeting was the first mention of Wheeling that T saw in a long time.

At the Board Meeting where architectural work for River was authorized, they moved money based on SW having federal funds and the I-294 project would not be ready to go. I assume that the $200 million Rebuild Illinois earmark is still around, but Pace isn't acknowledging NW and NS in the budget.

I also doubted Metzger's answer because NS isn't running 619, 620, 623, 627, 631-635 and 640, and has no intention of bringing them back. Re network revitalization, it still looks like Northbrook and The Glen are going to be cut. So, I can't see how NS can be over capacity. On the other hand, the most NW lost was the Randhurst segment of 696 and 694, and needed to pick up about 10 buses for Dempster Pulse.