Ann Arbor Amtrak ridership up 10 percent

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

http://www.utu.org/worksite/detail_news.cfm?ArticleID=32430

ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- Amtrak's ridership to and from its Ann Arbor station increased nearly 10 percent this year, according to new figures provided to Business Review last week. The increase in ridership reflected a statewide trend as Michigan was a catalyst in Amtrak's widely reported revenue growth.

Ann Arbor ridership increased about 9.95 percent from 127,705 in the 2005 fiscal year to 140,413 in the 2006 fiscal year, said Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari. This year's increase follows a 17.7 percent increase in 2005.

Amtrak considers ridership equal to the number of people who travel to or from a station. Its fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 through Sept. 30.

"The ridership on the trains through Ann Arbor has been going very well," Magliari said.

Ticket revenue on the Wolverine Service -- Amtrak's route from Detroit to Ann Arbor to Chicago -- increased 22.1 percent from about $11.75 million to about $14.35 million.

All three Amtrak routes in Michigan -- including the Pere Marquette line from Grand Rapids to Chicago and the Blue Water line from Port Huron/East Lansing to Chicago -- experienced ticket growth.

Magliari said Ann Arbor's growth was reflective of a broader trend of travelers shying away from long road trips due to fluctuating gas prices and concerns about air travel.

Therese Cody, an analyst for the Michigan Department of Transportation, said the dramatic increase in gas prices this summer likely had a positive impact on Amtrak's growth.

"I think that's a big reason," she said. "There's a threshold that I think gas prices have exceeded."

Ridership in Ann Arbor may have also benefited from massive road construction near Chicago on Interstate 94, Magliari said.

Cody concurred, saying back-ups on the Dan Ryan Expressway may have caused travelers to abandon the road for the rail.

"There is a lot of travel to Chicago," she said. "That may impact it somewhat." MDOT reports ridership figures somewhat differently than Amtrak.

MDOT reported that the number of riders in Ann Arbor increased 10.4 percent in 2006. MDOT's figures differ slightly because Amtrak uses a formula that accounts for the number of riders in Michigan whose destination is unknown.

MDOT only measures the number of people who departed or stopped at each station.

This year marked the highest level of ridership ever in Michigan for Amtrak.

 

[amtrakmichigan]

http://www.utu.org/worksite/detail_news.cfm?ArticleID=32430

ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- Amtrak's ridership to and from its Ann Arbor station increased nearly 10 percent this year, according to new figures provided to Business Review last week. The increase in ridership reflected a statewide trend as Michigan was a catalyst in Amtrak's widely reported revenue growth.

Ann Arbor ridership increased about 9.95 percent from 127,705 in the 2005 fiscal year to 140,413 in the 2006 fiscal year, said Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari. This year's increase follows a 17.7 percent increase in 2005.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If my mental timeline is correct, there was major road construction through most of 2005 at the Ann Arbor station. A road bridge was completly replaced over the tracks practically on top of the station. This closed the long-term parking lot for about 2 years. During this time I used the Dearborn station, since other long term parking in this area of Ann Arbor is very hard to find. I am sure many other frequent travelers used the stations at Dearborn or Jackson during this time frame too. It would probably be more acurate to compare years 2006 to 2004 as far as passengers using the Ann Arbor station.

 

[Guest]

It would probably be more acurate to compare years 2006 to 2004 as far as passengers using the Ann Arbor station.

Using MDOT data, here is Ann Arbor ridership for the past several fiscal years:

FY2006 137,361

FY2005 124,473

FY2004 106,353

FY2003 91,619

FY2002 88,620

FY2001 87,346

FY2000 91,622

FY1999 95,279

FY1998 103,395

FY1997 114,444

FY1996 100,942

FY1995 98,983

FY1994 78,687

As you can see, ridership has gone up and down quite a lot over the years, but the past two have been stellar (both for the Michigan routes in general and for Ann Arbor in particular). I would love to see one or two more round trips added to the Detroit route, but I think it is unlikely that Michigan will follow Illinois' example given the fiscal challenges that the state is facing.

 

[PennCentralFan]

Where can you find stats for other cities of the Wolverine like Kalamazoo or Jackson or Niles.

 

[amtrakmichigan]

It would probably be more acurate to compare years 2006 to 2004 as far as passengers using the Ann Arbor station.

Using MDOT data, here is Ann Arbor ridership for the past several fiscal years:

FY2006 137,361

FY2005 124,473

FY2004 106,353

FY2003 91,619

FY2002 88,620

FY2001 87,346

FY2000 91,622

FY1999 95,279

FY1998 103,395

FY1997 114,444

FY1996 100,942

FY1995 98,983

FY1994 78,687

As you can see, ridership has gone up and down quite a lot over the years, but the past two have been stellar (both for the Michigan routes in general and for Ann Arbor in particular). I would love to see one or two more round trips added to the Detroit route, but I think it is unlikely that Michigan will follow Illinois' example given the fiscal challenges that the state is facing.

I am very happy to see that the numbers really did increase. I thought that Amtrak may have tried to say that were up in ridership from a station that was difficult for passengers to access for the years 2004/2005.

I really dont think additional trains are needed on the exsisting Wolverine route. However I have pointed out in other post that the Pere Marquette train should continue east past Grand Rapids to include East Lansing, Howell / Brighton , Plymouth / Livonia and finally Detroit. The 1969 C&O employee timetable shows the passenger speed limit between Grand Rapids & Detroit is 60 MPH for the most part. Today this route contains many intermodel trains and I expect that track condition have improved since 1969. As of today Grand Rapids, Lansing & Detroit ARE NOT directly connected. Detroit and Grand Rapids is the two largest cities in Michigan and they are not connected directly with the state capitol (Lansing). If an additional route is added from Detroit to Chicago, I would like to see serious consideration from Amtrak and the State of Michigan to continue the Pere Marqutte east to Detroit.

 

[mkellerm]

Where can you find stats for other cities of the Wolverine like Kalamazoo or Jackson or Niles.

The Michigan Department of Transportation has a great web page with passenger rail statistics; it almost makes up for the rather sparse material that they have posted on passenger rail in Michigan. The direct link is: http://mdotwas1.mdot.state.mi.us/public/railstats/

I really dont think additional trains are needed on the exsisting Wolverine route. However I have pointed out in other post that the Pere Marquette train should continue east past Grand Rapids to include East Lansing, Howell / Brighton , Plymouth / Livonia and finally Detroit. The 1969 C&O employee timetable shows the passenger speed limit between Grand Rapids & Detroit is 60 MPH for the most part. Today this route contains many intermodel trains and I expect that track condition have improved since 1969. As of today Grand Rapids, Lansing & Detroit ARE NOT directly connected. Detroit and Grand Rapids is the two largest cities in Michigan and they are not connected directly with the state capitol (Lansing). If an additional route is added from Detroit to Chicago, I would like to see serious consideration from Amtrak and the State of Michigan to continue the Pere Marqutte east to Detroit.

Of course, in an ideal world there would be service on the old Pere Marquette route. This is a far from ideal world, however, and the sad fact is that very few people want to go to Detroit. If you look at the ridership on the Chicago-Detroit line, you rarely see passengers from Jackson, Battle Creek, or Kalamazoo headed east. When you add that to the fact that the experience of other states (California, Maine, and Illinois, to mention three) suggests that increasing frequency gets you more bang for the buck that adding single round trips on new territory, my vote is for more Wolverines. Chicago-Detroit has always been busier than Chicago-St. Louis, which now has five round trips a day. As a second priority, I would say add round-trips to the current state-supported routes. Once we get that, then we can talk about a Detroit-GRR train.