Comments on: AATA Adopts Vision: Countywide Service

By: Joel Batterman

Joel Batterman — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:48:32 +0000

If AATA is going to be a convenient transport option for more people, service needs to be increased. It seems odd that a halving of the Ann Arbor millage is being discussed just as several very substantial projects are in the works (WALLY, N-S connector).

I had a look at the dedication plaque on the Blake Transit Center a few months ago, and I think I remember the station being about twenty years old.

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:09:13 +0000

Earlier discussions (last year) included the idea of retaining Ann Arbor’s millage tax, adding an additional county tax, and using the Ann Arbor dedicated millage to continue funding Ann Arbor service. This of course will not seem fair to many Ann Arbor residents but would be far superior to reducing our millage and service levels. At this time in history, we need a robust intracity transit system even more. My concern is that the AATA board seems to be emphasizing the needs of commuters into Ann Arbor as a priority above the needs of within-city travelers. I hope that I am mistaken.

By: Chuck Warpehoski

Chuck Warpehoski — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:48:29 +0000

I’m glad to see the step forward to go county-wide, but I think Ted Annis’ vision of cutting Ann Arbor funding is a poor one. I doubt that his numbers are sufficient to provide adequate service across the county, and I’d like to see a dynamic urban system along with lifeline services to the out-county areas.

It will take a lot of work to make sure the balance of serving the urban core and the out-county areas works out, so I look forward to seeing how the iterative process goes.

By: Leslie Morris

Leslie Morris — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:51:45 +0000

I agree with Jeff Irwin and John Floyd that a cut of 50% in the Ann Arbor City transit millage would almost certainly result in service cutbacks in Ann Arbor, when as a transit user I would like to see improved service, particularly on weekends and evenings.

On the issue of falling ridership, I noticed a sharp falloff in ridership on route 22 after the loss of the convenient Arborland bus stop last July. At least four times I have been the only rider on the bus. Most trips (midday)there are now only a handfull of riders on this route. It appears that most of the midday riders from northeast Ann Arbor who used this bus to shop at Arborland have chosen to shop elsewhere, or else to drive there. I fear much of the midday service on this route will disappear, because of the move to the very unsatisfactory stop across the street, which has no shelter, no bench, and requires three different street crossings to get to Arborland.

By: John Floyd

John Floyd — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:22:59 +0000

Hard to see how the switch to a county-wide system, plus a 50% reduction in taxes from Ann Arbor, could avoid Ann Arbor service cuts.

By: Jeff Irwin

Jeff Irwin — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:26:35 +0000

I’m so happy that AATA is moving forward on developing a detailed vision for countywide service. Ann Arbor, the City of Ypsilanti and the surrounding townships are part of one economic region. Connecting all of those people and places will be a great benefit to citizens, employers, our educational institutions and our economy generally.

To put it mildly, this could be the beginning of something very positive for Washtenaw County. A community conversation is desperately needed and AATA is definitely the right leader for that conversation. I’m just disappointed that I couldn’t be there to cheer them on (instead I was at the County Board Working Session cheering on our energy efficiency and conservation efforts).

My one concern, especially as an Ann Arbor taxpayer, is the notion of cutting my service in half (we currently pay 2.06 mills and a reduction to 1 mill would be a huge service cut). The #4 is currently packed and we could probably benefit from some express routes along Washtenaw at peak hours. I hope that AATA will consider multiple scenarios for funding that include at least continuing current service levels if not increasing them.

By: Steve Bean

Steve Bean — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:13:24 +0000

Oops. My math isn’t right since there are more days in the month than workdays. Can’t really get a good per-day number.

By: Steve Bean

Steve Bean — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:06:14 +0000

There was one fewer weekday in October 2009 than in October 2008, not the other way around.

650,238/23 * 22 = 621,966. Still 55k, (2532/day) higher than 2009. What portion is due to job losses? And the remainder? Was there a drop in September? The fare increase theory is also not negated by the drop in fare-supported ridership. This issue seems worthy of more attention than it appears its being given by the board.

How old is BTC?