New Bridge Announcement

[jtf1972]

PREDICTION - Once the new bridge is built, Windsor will outlaw all semi-truck traffic to and from their end of the Ambassador Bridge. No wonder Moroun is up in arms- his bridge will become a non-commercial traffic only bridge.

What is really to stop Canada from deciding to block streets & build a new park at the Ambassador Bridge approach? A biking bridge, anyone? LOL

[Richard]

So basically Richard is saying we need to vote for every infrastructure project. I can't wait till November so I can vote to repair a pothole on Van Dyke.

Actually potholes would be repaired from the cities general fund and not requiring a vote.But because the city is now using bonds to cover daily expenses when it does come time to fix the infrastructure which is what the bonds are really for,they will be maxed out,and then to fix your potholes it will be necessary to raise taxes to bring the credit level up on the bonds.

Most likely at that time you will be asked to vote on the tax increase to fix the potholes or lights etc., or you can just give the city cart blanch to raise you taxes as they see fit ,I may be mistaken but that may just fall under the category of taxation without representation.

[Shollin]

Actually potholes would be repaired from the cities general fund and not requiring a vote.But because the city is now using bonds to cover daily expenses when it does come time to fix the infrastructure which is what the bonds are really for,they will be maxed out,and then to fix your potholes it will be necessary to raise taxes to bring the credit level up on the bonds.

Most likely at that time you will be asked to vote on the tax increase to fix the potholes or lights etc., or you can just give the city cart blanch to raise you taxes as they see fit ,I may be mistaken but that may just fall under the category of taxation without representation.

Van Dyke is a state trunkline which is maintained by MDOT.

[Danny]

Goodbye Del-Rey

[Shollin]

Hasn't Delray long been gone? I would offer the residents a tax foreclosed property in a more stable neighborhood and give them a budget to renovate. I think it's a win-win situation. Detroit helps to stabilize neighborhoods on the brink, and the residents get to move into better neighborhoods and likely better houses.

[Bham1982]

You claim we need no more capacity.

I want to see the evidence we need more capacity. We have tremendous investments in three international crossings, none of which appear to be close to capacity.

Now we want to destroy another Detroit neighborhood, right after we finished pushing all the Mexicans from traditional Mexicantown to Springwells.

If we really, truly need a second span, why not put it near the original Ambassador. We built all the infrastructure there, and it sits mostly empty. The off-ramps are empty, the visitors center is empty.

If the issue is Maroun, then lock him out of the new bridge. But don't destroy another neighborhood, when you just destroyed the first under the guise of "economic development".

[Bham1982]

Hasn't Delray long been gone?

Delray is long gone, but the other side of I-75 is probably the most successful working class/poor neighborhood in Detroit. The highway "improvements" will take acres of land on both sides of I-75.

Of course, the proponents are only talking about Delray, so that they can characterize the land takings as positively as possible. They aren't talking about their takings in Springwells, and the demolished homes and businesses.

[Jason]

I want to see the evidence we need more capacity. We have tremendous investments in three international crossings, none of which appear to be close to capacity.

That evidence has already been around for a long time now and it's been accepted. There's been report after report after report and all you have to do is a google search.

If we really, truly need a second span, why not put it near the original Ambassador. We built all the infrastructure there, and it sits mostly empty. The off-ramps are empty, the visitors center is empty.

It's very very well known that Canada flat out won't let another bridge be built there. They won't because it's a dumb idea. It dumps the trucks onto a local road that's not well suited for truck traffic. The new bridge will connect directly to freeways on both sides. And as you should already know Matty already started building a second span and he's had to stop because Canada won't let him.

If the issue is Maroun, then lock him out of the new bridge. But don't destroy another neighborhood, when you just destroyed the first under the guise of "economic development".

He's made this whole thing difficult and drawn out, but the issue isn't him. In fact he'll probably be the one who operates the new bridge.

Delray is long gone, but the other side of I-75 is probably the most successful working class/poor neighborhood in Detroit. The highway "improvements" will take acres of land on both sides of I-75.

The entire project except for the interchange will be south of the train tracks. The interchange itself might require a few houses to be demolished but it's not as drastic as you're imagining. http://www.partnershipborderstudy.co...e_DRIC_ROD.pdf Here you can see that the interchange doesn't really cut into the neighborhood. It looks like this plan is outdated because the area the newspapers are showing goes farther east, but none of the drawings show an interchange that cuts into the neighborhood.

[jerrytimes]

I want to see the evidence we need more capacity. We have tremendous investments in three international crossings, none of which appear to be close to capacity.

Now we want to destroy another Detroit neighborhood, right after we finished pushing all the Mexicans from traditional Mexicantown to Springwells.

If we really, truly need a second span, why not put it near the original Ambassador. We built all the infrastructure there, and it sits mostly empty. The off-ramps are empty, the visitors center is empty.

If the issue is Maroun, then lock him out of the new bridge. But don't destroy another neighborhood, when you just destroyed the first under the guise of "economic development".

Don't destroy another neighborhood? That's been done YEARS AGO. You act like the place is a nice place to live. I'm looking at it on Google and the place is mostly empty lots.

[mikeg19]

Delray was long gone the minute it was proposed the new bridge was going to go there many years ago. Read numerous articles of people lining up to sell their homes to get out of there. And as far as capacity, all of the reports that the crossings aren't near it right now is probably accurate. But with the gradual economic turnaround will come more trade and production. It would seem pretty unintelligent to go the route of waiting for all crossings to meet capacity, then build a new bridge. Preemptive work to build this bridge now and have it open in 4-5 years [[probably more realistically 8-10 with all the forthcoming litigation) would allow for a smooth transition to handle all the new border crossing volume. I really don't understand the mentality of those wanting the capacity to be near max with border traffic backups for hours before exploring the idea of developing a new crossing. Be proactive, get the ball rolling, build the bridge, don't have problems. Seems pretty simple to me.

[DTWflyer]

This bridge is most definetely needed. Have any of you driven across the Ambassador Bridge on weekday? It is scary experience with all of the truck traffic on the bridge and on Huron Church through Windsor.

Whether we like it or not, Canada wants this bridge done. They are already well on the way toward building the $1.4 B Parkway to connect the 401 to the new bridge.

Yes, the Blue Water handles a lot of traffic. However pretty much anything automotive heading to any of the Detroit area assembly plants is coming across the Ambassador.

[compn]

so uh, are they going to make a rail bridge too and avoid all of those diesel trucks?

[rb336]

There is already a rail tunnel, and plans for a new one to accommodate double-deck freight trains

[jackie5275]

Michigan and Detroit are a part of this country and this country is still a democracy ,I think anyways. How do you tell the taxpayers what is going to happen without allowing their input?It is the Goveners duty to provide the clear facts to the taxpayers as he works for them not the other way around.

To my surprise, I was at a church festival on Saturday when I was approached by a woman wanting me to sign a petition to put the bridge to a vote on the November ballot. I thought it was kind of late to circulate such a petition, but apparently there is an effort being made to get the taxpayers to vote on it.

[Shollin]

One of the renders shows a West Delray development. I guess they plan to move the people a few blocks west into a new development.

[Hypestyles]

There should also be a light rail tram incorporated into the bridge, to accommodate non-driving commuters/tourists.. Incorporate a bus depot/hub at both ends of the bridge.. I have sent a letter to Canada's consulate regarding this..

[Wheels]

There should also be a light rail tram incorporated into the bridge, to accommodate non-driving commuters/tourists.. Incorporate a bus depot/hub at both ends of the bridge.. I have sent a letter to Canada's consulate regarding this..

I'm sure they will get right on that!

[401don]

There should also be a light rail tram incorporated into the bridge, to accommodate non-driving commuters/tourists.. Incorporate a bus depot/hub at both ends of the bridge.. I have sent a letter to Canada's consulate regarding this..

The purpose of this bridge is so that everyone can bypass Windsor & Detroit.

[Phizzy]

They are telling you that no Michigan taxpayers are going to put any funds into the bridge.

What they are doing is using Canada's 500 million to leverage the 2 billion that the feds are putting in towards roads.Because they could not get the funds without their skin in the game ie. the 500 million down payment.

So they tell you and make it spelled out clearly NO Michigan taxpayers funds.

So now the legislator says it is now law that no Michigan taxpayer funds can be used point blank,Michigan taxpayers pay federal taxes,federal taxes are being used to build the bridge,so Michigan taxpayers are funding the bridge.

The $2.2 billion Michigan is going to be leveraging from Federal matching funds is not going towards construction of the NITC, so which Federal taxes are going to be used to build the bridge?

[Richard]

The $2.2 billion Michigan is going to be leveraging from Federal matching funds is not going towards construction of the NITC, so which Federal taxes are going to be used to build the bridge?

Okay in theory the bridge itself is built by Canada without Michigan taxpayer funds but you cannot just stick a bridge there without access.

Snyder has pledged the bridge will be built without money from Michigan taxpayers.

The bridge itself is expected to cost about $1 billion and be privately financed by the contractor who builds it. Customs plazas and connecting roadways on both sides of the bridge are expected to cost more than $2 billion.

The U.S. government is expected to contribute about $264 million to the new Customs plaza in Detroit.

Canada is to pay up to $550 million to cover Michigan's expense on the bridge, which will then allow the state to get up to $2 billion in U.S. federal matching funds.

and that is what they are saying so far.Who will cover the 40 to 60% cost overruns that are the norm?

How much do you think Matty will ask for his large piece of property sitting in the path?

Bonds will be used to secure financing I forget the exact numbers but DIBC brings in 50 million a year and the new bridge is expecting 70 million a year so is the DIBC actually losing 70 million a year in revenue? I think if it was they would have done something long ago.

So by using bonds to finance the construction if they go into default for some reason who will then cover the debt?You already have learned that the state backs Detroit bonds so who is going to back the bridge bonds?

[Hypestyles]

I'm sure they will get right on that!

this project must "think big"! think of the future of cross-city, cross-national, "mega-city" transit..

[Richard]

this project must "think big"! think of the future of cross-city, cross-national, "mega-city" transit..

The new Amtrak wolverine station is going to be or proposed in the Areo park if you look at the proposed pictures of the bridge they show the rail line.So if you live in downtown Detroit you will just have to figure out how to get there.

[corktownyuppie]

Okay in theory the bridge itself is built by Canada without Michigan taxpayer funds but you cannot just stick a bridge there without access.

Snyder has pledged the bridge will be built without money from Michigan taxpayers.

The bridge itself is expected to cost about $1 billion and be privately financed by the contractor who builds it. Customs plazas and connecting roadways on both sides of the bridge are expected to cost more than $2 billion.

The U.S. government is expected to contribute about $264 million to the new Customs plaza in Detroit.

Canada is to pay up to $550 million to cover Michigan's expense on the bridge, which will then allow the state to get up to $2 billion in U.S. federal matching funds.

and that is what they are saying so far.Who will cover the 40 to 60% cost overruns that are the norm?

How much do you think Matty will ask for his large piece of property sitting in the path?

Bonds will be used to secure financing I forget the exact numbers but DIBC brings in 50 million a year and the new bridge is expecting 70 million a year so is the DIBC actually losing 70 million a year in revenue? I think if it was they would have done something long ago.

So by using bonds to finance the construction if they go into default for some reason who will then cover the debt?You already have learned that the state backs Detroit bonds so who is going to back the bridge bonds?

These are all important points, some of which need to be resolved:

[[1) Bridge bonds will not be revenue-only bonds, not backed by anything else. This is similar to the Yankee Stadium bonds that are backed only by ticket sales. Investors will do their own due diligence...if the risk outweighs the return, they will not buy the bonds...which will drive the interest rate on them higher and higher. That will likely kill the deal.

Is it possible that the bonds will get backed by the state or some other authority? Of course. But that's not out there yet, and until it is, we can't be angry about something that hasn't happened yet.

[[Note, Michigan does not back Detroit General Obligation bonds...the State may have chosen to back specific ones in order to make financing possible, but rest assured that those bonds get a higher priority to be paid back than some BB- General Obligation bond running around out there.)

[[2) As the construction will be contractor-financed, they will run their own studies to determine whether or not overruns and over-stated traffic estimations risk them getting paid back. If the estimates are too low, then no contractor will do the work. It will kill the deal. If they go forward anyway and it turns out that operating revenues are short, then it was their risk and they'll pay the price.

So this bridge is not a done deal yet. But finally we can let the private market of contractors do their own studies and figure out what's likely and not likely. We don't have to decide whose studies are right or not right. If a contractor is willing to take the risk, it's theirs for the taking.

And, by the way, it's totally feasible that the City of Windsor prohibits or somehow makes difficult truck passage through the Ambassador bridge. That would all of a sudden make the new bridge plenty profitable. But that's not on us. That's all about Canada.

I say we go forward and see what the contractor-studies bring.

[Mikeg]

This bridge is most definetely needed.........
Whether we like it or not, Canada wants this bridge done......

Here's some quotes from a Canadian opinion article that suggests this bridge deal is not only a national embarrassment but also too much, too late:

Economically, Canada and the United States are joined at the hip. Each country is the other’s number-one trading partner — in 2011, the two-way trade in goods and services totaled $681 billion, more than U.S. trade with Mexico or China — and trade with Canada supports more than eight million U.S. jobs. Yet the Obama administration has recently jeopardized this important relationship.

After years of procrastination, Canada finally secured an agreement for a new Detroit-Windsor bridge — over which 25 percent of trade between Canada and the United States crosses — but only after it offered to cover all of the initial costs. The U.S. share is to be repaid over time by the tolls collected, but any shortfalls will rest with Canadian taxpayers. Canada was essentially forced to hold negotiations with Michigan; the U.S. federal government observed quietly from the sidelines.

Of course, the U.S.-Canadian relationship has had its rocky moments before. In the 1970s and 1980s, in response to public concern over the United States’ economic domination of Canada, Ottawa enacted a wide variety of protectionist measures that irritated Washington. Eventually, the two countries recognized their mutual interests and resolved what differences they had, ratifying the Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement in 1987 and its successor, NAFTA, seven years later.

Back then, Canada had little choice but to find a way to fix its relationship with the United States, the only game in town. Ottawa is in a different position now. Today, it enjoys a respectable platform of self-confidence, having weathered the financial crisis and ensuing recession far better than the United States. And unlike in the past, Canada can now look beyond its own neighborhood for economic opportunities — especially to the rising economies of Asia.

To be sure, Canadian companies will never abandon the U.S. market. Nevertheless, the U.S. recession and the rise of Asia have allowed Canada to diversify its economic relations. In 2010, only 68 percent of Canadian exports were destined for the United States, down from 85 percent in 2000.

To summarize their viewpoint, their sovereign nation was "essentially forced" to negotiate with a province of their largest trading partner to secure an agreement for a new bridge that, when and if it is finally built [[using Canadian funds), will be carrying a steadily declining percentage of Canadian exports.

[Wesley Mouch]

To summarize their viewpoint, their sovereign nation was "essentially forced" to negotiate with a province of their largest trading partner to secure an agreement for a new bridge that, when and if it is finally built [[using Canadian funds), will be carrying a steadily declining percentage of Canadian exports.

Who cares is the percentage is 'declining', so long as the volume is increasing.

I don't see that they were "essentially forced" to do anything. To a great degree, this is really between Ontario and Michigan. Ontario represents most of Canadian manufacturing. And their federal government realizes this, and is supporting it. On the other hand, the US doesn't really see the value of Michigan manufacturing.