How The County Politicians Beat The DRIC City Slickers

The slide above from a PowerPoint presentation made by Sam Schwartz during his first presentation in Windsor will prove to be the key document if there is going to be a lawsuit over the border crossing.

Let there be no doubt about it. The three Canadian Governments--Windsor, Ontario and Federal--may bicker amongst themselves like children dividing up the spoils. However, they are united in trying to force the Ambassador Bridge Company to sell their crossing as cheaply as possible so that any new bridge will be built beside the existing bridge as was done in Sarnia and as is being proposed at the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie.

It has always made the most sense to do that in Windsor going back as early as the position put forward by the Binational Partnership, the predecessor to DRIC. Even DRIC said that the Ambassador Bridge location was the best site on the US side for a new bridge.

I'll come back to this later in this BLOG. Let me first talk about the County Council meeting last night. I must admit that I did not time the DRIC attendance in front of County Council but it was around the 60 minute mark I would guess rather than the four hours plus at Windsor Council. There were some zingers directed towards DRIC so it was not all pleasant but it was not done in a harsh fashion that would gather headlines for the particular politician involved.

I probably learned more listening to DRIC at this session than I did listening to the entire debate at Windsor Council. I learned that DRIC did do their homework respecting the waste known as Greenlink and at least believe that they have a defensible position with respect to the Environmental Assessment.

I also learned that the DRIC process with respect to the border crossing itself can be easily attacked by an experienced environmental lawyer which frankly may mean starting the whole process all over again. When push comes to shove, in my opinion, it was clear last night that DRIC did not do their job.

It is interesting how much information one can gather from a civilized conversation between adults rather than a pseudo-cross-examination session by wanna-be lawyers. The questioning I thought was direct and to the point with each of the various County politicians only being allowed to ask a few questions at a time and in rotation so that each of them had the opportunity to ask what was important to that person. By the end of several go-arounds, most of the key questions had been asked and answered.

It fell to the County Engineer who was asked a question by the Mayor of LaSalle to put a stake in the heart of Greenlink and end it as a viable alternative as far as I was concerned. And he did all within five to 10 minutes of comment.

Let me give a very brief summary of what was said as it came out last night:

• Dave Wake stated that one of the purpose of the DRIC was to provide new capacity for the border crossing


• with respect to roadway redundancy, Mayor McNamara asked about connections to the Ambassador Bridge, especially the last two to 3 km from EC Row north to that Bridge. It was his view that if the DRIC road was connected to the Bridge it would improve on redundancy. The answer given was that the Parkway would provide a choice to use the Parkway or to exit at EC Row to follow Huron Church for the last few kilometres to the Ambassador Bridge. Dave Wake said that DRIC always assumed that the Ambassador Bridge would stay in place and serve as an important role in the border crossings. He stated that there was no plan to undertake additional work in the City's portion of the roadway beyond E C Row. [Note: It means no connections for the Bridge Co. to the DRIC road].


• Mayor McNamara, helping out the City, said that he is concerned with the removal of trucks from city streets and he believed that the City, the Province and the Ambassador Bridge must deal with that


• it was stated that all alternatives including tunneling and below grade have mitigation measures in place that would reduce noise levels


• the amount of pollution is the same regardless of the solution and that the air quality of each solution is the same with the same amount of emissions into the atmosphere. The effects of the roadway diminishes after 50 m from the road. It is important to remember that 80% of the pollutants come from sources other than the roadway


• long tunnels have concentrated pollution at the portals. There is no scrubbing technology that will work and the effect of vegetation is limited


• Deputy Mayor Burton suggested that if there was a municipal funding component, there would have been a solution by now after three years of study (ie easy for the City to demand entitlement when it has to pay nothing in other words)


• there was disappointment that the DRIC project does not address immediate traffic problems moving traffic to the Ambassador Bridge. It was confirmed that Windsor has not asked for study about how to do so or that an extension to the Ambassador Bridge be built.


• Dave Wake said that DRIC was charged with finding a new river crossing, new plazas in both countries and connections to freeways in both countries


• Wake stated that improving access to the Ambassador Bridge would be accomplished by moving traffic from the Parkway to EC Row. At EC Row and Huron Church, the Parkway then shifts to the west thereby providing a direct access to the new crossing and providing also a high-quality access to Huron Church for the last few kilometres to the Bridge. DRIC therefore has gone a long way to improve access to the Ambassador Bridge because of this split in traffic


• expropriation costs are to be paid by the Province only and is not part of the eligible capital costs required to be paid by the Federal Government [NOTE: The Provincial share will be over 50% of the total DRIC project cost.]



• refinements include possible realignment of pedestrian overpasses that may need improvement, putting back some overpasses, looking exactly at where tunnels should be and what parks could look like


• I did not get the impression that refinements included lengthening tunnels or linking tunnels together. [NOTE: Here is a fundamental difference between the City and DRIC.]. DRIC views tunnels merely as linkage for communities across the corridor; it does not view tunnels as a tool for mitigation for air quality. Air quality improvements are due to eliminating traffic signals, eliminating idling plus the change in fuel standards and emission controls on trucks


• as far as DRIC was concerned they believe that they followed the requirements of the Environmental Assessment process in a diligent, thorough, and careful way as they moved forward


• again, a concern was expressed that DRIC did not involve looking at the Ambassador Bridge or study on how to improve the corridor to the Bridge


• it was to be expected that the new bridge would remove the traffic from Huron Church. It was estimated that there would be a diversion of 40 to 60% of international traffic using the new crossing. Accordingly, it was believed that Huron Church would operate well during the peak hour conditions in the time period up to 2035


• there was a clear indication that the County was not interested in paying for maintenance of their share of the DRIC greenspace because it would be a very expensive in the future. That issue is still subject to discussion by the Province.

Then the County Engineer finished off Greenlink. He stated the following:

• the DRIC process went from being just a Transportation focus to looking at more factors by listening to Community inputs
• he has no major points of concern or issues with the Parkway and believes that it appropriately presents solutions
• with respect to Greenlink, he said both roads addressed the same core problems: transportation issues, environmental issues and social issues
• both solutions solve the problems with respect to transportation and capacity to the border
• all the alternatives improve air quality with Greenlink being equal to the Parkway
• he said that in the end it all comes down to social impacts which are hard to measure with respect to costs and benefits
• he effectively put the knife to Greenlink by saying that the social benefits of Greenlink come at a significant cost. What he said also was that he could not quantify the benefits to justify the cost.

So that is what was said in about an hour in a calm and civilized manner of questions and answers rather than grandstanding. It was a treat to watch.

Effectively, the County Engineer saw no advantage of Greenlink over the Parkway and probably thought there were better things that could be done rather than wasting an extra billion dollars to pretend that Eddie Francis achieved something. From the perspective of DRIC doing their job in the EA process, he provides a very good witness for DRIC.

But it was with DRIC itself, that astonished me. As far as I'm concerned, what I got out of this session was that DRIC was told that their job was to find a new crossing. That obviously biased their work since one of the alternatives that is looking more and more attractive these days with reduced traffic volumes is a "no build" solution. The fact that we know from the City meeting that DRIC did not look at a reasonable alternative that everybody knows about, the Enhancement Project, also seems to me to cause major problems for DRIC and the process.

It was the answer with respect to the two to 3 km to the Ambassador Bridge that concerns me the most. Unless that issue is addressed and dealt with properly, we are going to have litigation that will last for a decade costing not only hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees but also potentially causing massive disruption to the economies of this region and of Canada and the United States!

Look at the Schwartz drawing again. What does it show? Two lanes of traffic on Huron Church Road not the three lanes that exist today. That drawing was done deliberately as a pressure point to tell the Ambassador Bridge Company to sell out or their traffic would be squeezed. Here is part of what I wrote before in a BLOG that I wrote:

• "Forced Congestion As A Buy-Out Tool
  
  There's something about Greenlink that just bothers me...
  
  I can't really figure out why Sam stopped at the expressway and why he didn't go further with the road right to the bridge...
  
  What I think is a connection north of EC Row is designed to be the last-ditch effort to put the Ambassador Bridge out of business. The road to the border is being done a step at a time and my belief is that it is an effort by all of the three governments combined, Federal, Provincial and Municipal...
  
  The object is to build a variation of the DRIC road to the new bridge to remove as many trucks from going north on Huron Church Road as possible. Even the million or so local international trucks will be encouraged not to use that road. If that happens, or it seems to be happening, won't that put a squeeze on the Ambassador Bridge company that might force them to sell out?
  
  How will that be done? Very simply.
  
  If you remember the drawing that was shown in Sam's first presentation of "Huron Church “Boulevard” – The Champs Elysèes of Canada," the road in that drawing only showed two lanes north and south and not three. It showed a nice bicycling lane and a walkway for pedestrians that must have taken over one lane of traffic. If that doesn't show the City's perspective, then nothing does. Now perhaps the reason why the City is opposed, and has been opposed for the last five years, to any plan on Huron Church road is becoming clearer...
  
  Ontario Minister Cansfield has has made her contribution to the road issue:
  
  "People on Huron Church don’t want to mingle with heavy trucks.
  
  The Government's stated objective was to separate long-haul traffic from local traffic
  
  They want to have Huron Church as a viable business section again and to maintain economic viability ie have it as a commercial route for tourists, attractions, dinner
  
  The avoidance of large vehicles on that route is a huge and legitimate issue
  
  People have had difficult times along that stretch of highway
  
  Preferred route is a freeway with NO driveways off of it."
  
  Transport Minister Cannon on Melanie Deveau's show just had to come back and talk about the road during his interview when he said:
  
  "And of course the Government of Ontario is a partner as well as the Town of Windsor and so we have to be able to, I think, be open minded, listen to everything that has to be said and at the end of the day of course, we are going to make the decisions with the Government of Ontario on the specific design and the architecture of the road. But as I was mentioning this morning in the press conference, you know, I am a former town councillor and so I am always more sensitive to concerns that are brought up by people living in this area. The Ambassador Bridge, I come back to that Melanie just for a second, it is an important issue because you know there is the environmental assessment that they want to do, but at the end of the day there is also the fact that this access road will be going directly through the city of Windsor and I am not, I am not necessarily convinced that that is the right way and the right approach to take."

Effectively, that is what DRIC repeated at County Council. They have not looked at any connection to the Ambassador Bridge other than providing an exit that international traffic can use at the intersection of E C Row and Huron Church. Windsor has not looked at a way of connecting to the Bridge and it is not within DRIC's mandate to do so.

And then when the City closes down one lane in each direction on Huron Church Road as is shown in the drawing which otherwise makes no sense which trucker would ever use that road to go to the Bridge.

There was a bit of sneaky talk at the session as well that those who are uninformed would not understand. In answer to the question of diversion of traffic, the comment made was that 40 to 60% of the traffic would be diverted. That is very consistent with the approach taken by DRIC in the past that the traffic would be split 50-50.

However what they did not say is that most of the traffic to be diverted will probably be truck traffic. After all, if they exit at Huron Church, they will be forced still to deal with all the traffic lights. One only needs to look at the US DRIC numbers to understand that. In other words the most profitable part of the traffic will be diverted away from the Ambassador Bridge.

If that does not spell lawsuit, then I do not know what does. How that is consistent with what Transport Canada said in front of the Senate is beyond me. I guess it is their problem to try to rationalize all this not mine.

But let us assume that the diversion is 50-50 of all traffic, car and truck. Is that a good result for Windsor? Absolutely not! Again if we take DRIC at its word and its traffic projections as gospel, by 2035 traffic will have doubled in this area. What that means is that 50% of the 2035 traffic will still go on Huron Church and be the equivalent of all of the traffic that is on that road today.

If Huron Church cannot handle that traffic today, how can it handle it in 2035?

WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED BY DRIC? NOTHING!

DRIC has not achieved one of our key objective of removing trucks from City streets and has not built a solution that makes sense for international traffic. It means, in my opinion, that they need to go back to the drawing boards and start over again. What will that achieve other than more costs and more delays and more economic difficulties for Ontario and Michigan.

Senator Cropsey should be fuming, this time at Canadian DRIC!

DRIC is caught in this bind because it has not looked at this issue objectively but rather has written reports to achieve a goal that was predetermined in my opinion. If their job was to build a new crossing, then of course they would not look at the Ambassador Bridge since that helps out the competition and would scare away an investor for a P3 bridge.

DRIC did not openly say that before since the Bridge Company could have immediately sued. They play with numbers and talk about 40 to 60% diversion of traffic without mentioning its doubling (even though traffic volumes are actually declining) and forget to discuss the taking away of the real source of money on the crossings, the trucks.

No matter what DRIC does... their reasons for a new crossing have disappeared and all that they do is keep compounding their difficulties. The civilized County Meeting has done more damage to the DRIC cause than four hours of pretend lawyering at City Council.

No wonder they were instructed to be quiet in Windsor. Someone should have told them to be silent in the County as well!

The road is the last way that the Canadian Governments can try to squeeze the Bridge Company. While not unexpected, now that this is known publicly, it will be interesting to see how the Bridge Company reacts.

I do hope that the Globe and Mail writer was correct. Perhaps the Canadian Government will finally understand the importance of the Windsor/Detroit crossing to our economy, especially considering that the Harper Government is screwing up our NAFTA relationship with the United States:

• "Ottawa is starting to get serious about the things within its control. Public Works Minister Michael Fortier, for example, is spearheading Canadian efforts to replace the aging Ambassador Bridge, which links Windsor, Ont., and Detroit, Mich., along with approach roads and customs infrastructure. The $3-billion-plus project would go a long way to easing congestion at the busiest trade gateway to the United States."

If this is truly his job, I trust that Senator Fortier can understand that replacing does not necessarily mean building "new" today when it is not justified but can mean "enhancing" as well. If he cannot understand this subtle difference and figure out a solution to it, all that will happen is that a bunch of lawyers will have a very nice profitable and comfortable retirement in the future.