Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul
Post Number: 564 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 3:08 pm: | |
Thought that some of you all might be interested in attending this: http://www.ambassadorbridge.co m/workshop.pdf "[Detroit International Bridge Company]...is proposing to construct a 6-lane cable stayed bridge over the Detroit River, just west of the existing Ambassador Bridge. The new bridge will connect directly into the existing plazas in both Detroit and Windsor." This looks to be good news for the neighborhoods on the Detroit side; Windsor would probably rather have a new location. |
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100
Post Number: 520 Registered: 12-2006
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 3:13 pm: | |
So much for Delray if this happens... |
Aiw Member Username: Aiw
Post Number: 6178 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 3:18 pm: | |
Interesting that the "Warren Office" location is the Central Transport offices... It's not going to happen anytime soon. Windsor's passed a by-law stopping all demolition on this side of the river for at least 6 months, and adding a second span, requires authority from the Army Corps of Engineers in Cleveland. |
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul
Post Number: 565 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 3:48 pm: | |
Scs100, it looked to me that this plan would have the least amount of impact on the Detroit neighborhoods. After all, they said that they would use the existing plazas on each side. My biggest question however would be wouldn't they need to enlargen the existing plazas? A new bigger bridge wouldn't speed things up if there were the same number of border agents/booths at the plazas. |
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100
Post Number: 522 Registered: 12-2006
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 3:52 pm: | |
The DRIC was doing test drilling for a new bridge around Ft. Wayne. So I meant that there goes the plans for a Delray bridge. Sorry for not making that clear. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 2183 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 3:54 pm: | |
quote:It's not going to happen anytime soon. Windsor's passed a by-law stopping all demolition on this side of the river for at least 6 months, and adding a second span, requires authority from the Army Corps of Engineers in Cleveland. Actually, the Detroit District of the USACE has jurisdiction over the Detroit River. USACE Cleveland is an area office for the Buffalo District, whose jurisdiction doesn't begin until Toledo (and points eastward). Even then, if navigation is not impacted, and structures are not being erected within the waterway, I'm not sure how much leverage USACE has on this project. |
Jams Member Username: Jams
Post Number: 4836 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 4:03 pm: | |
https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/93839.html?1171904339 |
Dds Member Username: Dds
Post Number: 141 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 4:25 pm: | |
quote: Actually, the Detroit District of the USACE has jurisdiction over the Detroit River. USACE Cleveland is an area office for the Buffalo District, whose jurisdiction doesn't begin until Toledo (and points eastward). Even then, if navigation is not impacted, and structures are not being erected within the waterway, I'm not sure how much leverage USACE has on this project. USACE also has regulatory control over the entire shoreline as far as environmental impact. I'm pretty sure there would be leverage from that angle. |
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 754 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 5:10 pm: | |
The following statute was recently passed by the Canadian Parliament: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePu blications/Publication.aspx?Do cId=2669598&Language=e&Mode=1& File=32 Read section 6. I have posted it for ease of reference: 6. No person shall construct or alter an international bridge or tunnel without the approval of the Governor in Council. In fancy speak that means that no one can construct or make changes to an international bridge (such as the Ambassador Bridge) while first receiving the approval of the Government of Canada. See section 9 for the recourse the government has should someone construct or alter a bridge without the government's approval and see section 10 for the potential punishment that person could receive. |
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727
Post Number: 90 Registered: 07-2006
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 10:49 pm: | |
This whole process is the biggest pile of BS I have ever seen! There is an existing rail tunnel connecting from around the Post Office through to Canada that can support two lanes of truck traffic and is too low for the double-stacked rail cars so it is functionally obselete. A coworker of mine used to work in the little town right inside Sarnia where the two bridges and casino are... he says talking to his former coworkers that the second span there has not improved traffic at all during peak hours becuase the plazas were not expanded significiantly and they also lost some of thier TSA staffers. Building another span next to the Ambassador is the worst idea... ever. It would functionally be a parking lot for trucks waiting to get across. The bottleneck is not the bridge--it is the plazas. How this is such a tough pill to digest for Matty Moran is difficult for me to understand. I believe the project I think makes sense used to be called the "Jobs Tunnel"... and for the life of me I still don't understand why it isn't the front runner. The preferred plans down by Zug Island make hellufa lot more sense than a twin ambassador... at least they are planning area for a large plaza and there are convenient connections to freeways on both sides. |
Homer Member Username: Homer
Post Number: 88 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Sunday, February 25, 2007 - 11:31 pm: | |
No one can stop Manny, "KING of the WORLD" |
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 755 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Monday, February 26, 2007 - 9:44 am: | |
In defense of Manny (not that I want to, but factual accuracy is useful), he believes that the current bridge will not reach capacity until 2030 (and I believe that was a pre 9/11 estimate). He has been destroying homes, etc. on both sides of the River in order to build more primary inspection lanes for commercial traffic (see AiW's post above). Manny realizes that the plazas are the problem -- not the bridge itself. That being said, if the US and Canadian gov'ts build another bridge (Zug Island, etc.) the bridge is going to cut into Manny's business. The gov'ts are arguing that a new bridge is necessary (for capacity, redundancy, removing trucks from Windsor's streets). If Manny builds another a second span, he gets to keep the profits and also the chances a Zug Island bridge would be built becomes very small. |