Attempts to build twin span next to Ambassador Bridge dead for now

[Margaret's boy]

Ambassador Bridge company drops new span, but pushing for plaza expansion on west end [[msn.com)

[Satiricalivory]

It was always dead. There was no chance in hell it would ever happen. Nobody in a million years would finance a 2nd span when Gordie Howe was being built by the government.

[Richard]

With the slow down in cross border traffic and automotive supplies,nobody would finance it anyways on the private aspect,better to let the taxpayers pick up the losses,they have deep pockets.

Lots of NIMBY going on there also,bridge has been there 100 years and people just noticed it?

[Scottathew]

better to let the taxpayers pick up the losses

Infrastructure and government services generally don't make profits/losses. For example, police, fire, court system, local roads, etc...

There are very compelling reasons to have a government deliver those things.

[Richard]

There are also very compelling reasons for the government not to deliver things either,how are the government funded potholes doing near you?

Their rat out a pothole program started over 1 year ago,have they rounded them all up?

The government is the least efficient organization to be running anything on the taxpayers dime,it take 10 years to get a government road project online,that’s why they are always playing catch up,the private sector does not make money until the road is open,there is incentive to get it done now.

Back in the day every city had viable public transportation in the form of street cars,they were all privately funded.

The new bridge is a public/private funded enterprise,the catch is there is no risk to the private aspect because it is taxpayer backed the private aspect does not lose,the taxpayers in that deal is guaranteeing that the private investors will not lose,the taxpayers cover the losses the private investors reap the rewards with no risk.

With the ambassador,if there is a slow time,the owner takes the hit and not the taxpayers.

Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Texas, and Virginia all have private funded toll roads.


It is not uncommon for the private sector to own public infrastructure.

I kinda figured the allowing of the ambassador to be twin spanned was actually an opportunity,let them build another right alongside and the existing one becomes a joint venture between the owners and Canada and is maintained for people to walk across or bike to Canada or even run a light rail on it connecting Detroit and Windsor.

But that would require forward thinking and the only reason the other bridge is being built is so those who build it and the suppliers can increase their profits,it really has little to do with the average Joe.

Did you see what happened in Florida after the hurricane wiped out the road to the island,it was estimated to take 5 years to fix that,the governor removed the red tape and it was done in less then 1 week,that included bridges and surface roads.

Where have you ever seen the government build bridges and roads over water in 1 week from time of saying it was going to be done to the time of completion?

Thats the problem with government funded infrastructure,everybody has to get their cut,from the top to the bottom,if they do not it becomes stalled in the middle,and takes forever to even resurface a lousy mile.

What is going on with that whole tale of 2 bridges is not hurting the ambassador bridge company,it is the Canadian and Michigan taxpayers that are getting hurt in the process,the new bridge is designed to bypass Windsor and City of Detroit and the taxpayers of both cities will be the ones footing the bill while not being able to reap the rewards.

Why was the name Ambassador picked for that bridge? What did it signify ?

[Scottathew]

The Ambassador Bridge doesn't need to be twinned. The Gordie Howe bridge offers a freeway-to-freeway connection, the Ambassador does not. There's no use forcing more thru traffic into downtown Windsor.

You're spewing typical conservative talking points regarding roads - "The thing we've been sabotaging isn't working well!"

Want better roads? FUND THEM.

The government does have waste and we should do what we can to eliminate waste where we can. The private sector also has a ton of waste as well, we just typically call it "profit" as rolls into the pockets of the rich as we continue to cut taxes for them.

[K-slice]

You're spewing typical conservative talking points regarding roads - "The thing we've been sabotaging isn't working well!"

Want better roads? FUND THEM.

The government does have waste and we should do what we can to eliminate waste where we can. The private sector also has a ton of waste as well, we just typically call it "profit" as rolls into the pockets of the rich as we continue to cut taxes for them.

Truer words have never been spoken. Privatization of public works has destroyed the entire system. It used to be, government workers worked for public dollars, overseen by more government employees and the system worked.

Then came in private enterprise with a bunch of low wage employees offering the government to do the same job for less $$$. Gov fired all the talent they had, farmed out the work, and now we're all beholden to private enterprise for everything.

High speed rail in CA is a perfect example. The gov gets blamed for the massive cost overruns, but it's not gov employees managing construction, pouring cement, installing track, etc. That's all in the hands of private enterprise who see the taxpayer as their piggybank. They love cost overruns because that just means more money for them.

Anyway, were we talking about some bridge?

[Richard]

In 50 years we have spent $16 Trillion dollars on reducing poverty in the United States without reducing the level of poverty.

Families receive child tax credits every year,simply for having children.

We cut taxes for the non rich more then we give the rich tax credits.

Its not a conservative or democrat talking point,the infrastructure has been crumbling for over 50 years and there has been non conservative control just as there has been conservative control.

Taxpayers are seeing a $450 per month increase in the last 2 years,go to them and tell them you need more money for roads when they have been paying a lifetime for roads and got potholes in return.

Windsors support for the new bridge was based on reducing the flow of truck traffic through their city,what has changed?

Import laws and taxes that required auto manufacturers to ship parts back and forth instead of completed vehicles,the shift to EVs where manufacturers are setting up to be self supported and independent without having to cross borders.

In the future you are not going to see 1/2 the traffic cross border that you saw 10 years ago,that’s not a conservative talking point,that is basic economics.

You are using the same exact words that they used when they slammed freeways through the middle of cities.

We have to do it because it offers freeway to freeway connections and will improve the flow of traffic.

At what cost? Go to any major city and all of those freeways do little to improve the flow of traffic,because they all still become gridlocked and most times the speed on the freeway is no different then the speeds on surface streets.

It’s not about spending money or how much,it is about spending money efficiently,something the government has a really hard time doing.

33% of the commercial traffic coming across the border comes from Canada verses 10% coming from the United States into Canada.

The new bridge is funded by Canada because it benefits Canada,which is why it was not backed by the United States and built with U.S. taxpayer money,other then the agreement with Michigan for Michigan taxpayers to cover any losses.

So all you are really doing is asking the taxpayers of Michigan to help subsidize Canadas GDP without receiving the benefits,then complaining about subsidies to the rich,who do you think is building the bridge?

You cannot use the argument of subsidies to the rich while in the same breath supporting subsidies to the rich in the form of a bridge while at the same time offering to cover the losses they incur.

[Wesley Mouch]

What made no sense to me is that lack of a second span caused any loss of revenue or traffic. Delays seem to be 99 44/100% customs processing times. Is the bridge traffic capacity ever reached [[except when waiting for customs)? So why spend a lot of money on the smallest problem.

I suspect the move was mostly a bluff, hoping to discourage competition, or perhaps at least draw customs staff away from GH, and then increasing the value of AB.

Follow the money. Does anyone know how customs staff is assigned to ports of entry?

[Richard]

It started in 2016 by pulling agents from the northern border and putting them at the southern border,2019 bi-partisan New York politicians created the BOUND act,that required minimum staffing levels.

Its like that at any border crossing,try a 2 hour wait at the Mexican/California borders.

Just like it is at the DMV.

There is no border crossing that actually flows seamlessly.

You can tell we here things are going,not by looking at today but by looking 5-10-20 years ahead,Michigan/Canada border is a majority of automotive goods flipping back and forth.

Auto manufacturing is switching to localized production and not dependent on a global supply chain.That is a big chunk that make up the cross border traffic.

Windsors major complaint was about the truck traffic,until they were not there then they wanted to arrest them,but at any rate,in the future the truck traffic would have been a non issue anyways.

My guess is the age of the bridge is expensive to maintain,a new twin span can be depreciated with minimum maintenance costs because it is new.

No matter what happens,it does have a historical nature and was an important part of the regions history and I think it is wrong for Canada to dictate what we retain and do not in that aspect.

If we are going to follow the money,why the demand to demolish it ?

That is government dictating to free enterprise and removing the competition,that would be like the Hudson’s site having the city not approve any building permits for any more projects other then theirs.

But it is not the government of Canada that is making that decision,it’s the private investors building the new bridge that is advocating for the removal of any competition.

It’s not the ambassador bridge against the Canadian government in this,it is the private investor that owns the ambassador bridge against the private investors that want to build a new bridge and are using the Canadian government as their tool to achieve that.

If one really wants to follow the money.

[Meddle]

My hope is that once the real bridge is built, they'll relegate this Maroon Boondoggle to local city to city traffic only. No through freight in either direction.

[Richard]

My hope is that once the real bridge is built, they'll relegate this Maroon Boondoggle to local city to city traffic only. No through freight in either direction.

As long as you understand the ramifications.

Ambassador pays millions in business and corporate tax to the city of Detroit.

So along with your wishful thinking,the real bridge,city of Detroit will see no taxes and a loss of millions in property taxes from the buildings and homes that were demolished in order to build the new bridge.

Somebody has to make up for that loss,that would be the citizens of Detroit.

Emotions come at a cost,we are paying $450 a month extra just for the privilege of not seeing any mean tweets,so what is an increased tax obligation placed on the city residents just so they can stick it to the bad guy going to matter,the taxpayers have deep pockets anyways,and it is not like the city of Detroit residents are suffering from high taxes so what are a few unnecessary more on top.

At the end of the day,Canada or Windsor could care less if Detroit as a city exists at all,just like many others who seem to try and systematically destroy it.

When somebody says - We do not want those trucks going through our city,but it is okay to destroy another cities neighborhood so we can be okay,they are not really doing anything in your best interests.

Once again if the ambassador bridge does not make any money,it cost the taxpayers nothing,if the new bridge does not make money,the taxpayers have guaranteed to pay the losses.

I could have made a really short post and just said,no matter what happens,you are not screwing the ambassador,you are screwing yourself and the city.

[Dumpling]

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/s/sclead/...main;view=text

This is one of the references at the end of the Wikipedia article about the Ambassador Bridge. There is a statement that the New York financier, Joseph A. Bower, who assembled the finances and government approvals for the bridge, named it the Ambassador Bridge in honor of the peaceful relations between the United States and Canada at the time of the bridge's construction. It was completed in 1929.

[I wondered where it got its name as well.]

[Gistok]

I don't think that they can restrict the Ambassador Bridge to just vehicular traffic. Also, the Gordie Howe bridge will have billions in debt to pay off, and therefore the tolls will have to pay off that obligation.

The Ambassador is debt free, and they can undercut the price of truckers crossing vs the Howe bridge.

[Satiricalivory]

Pretty sure the Canadian government can do whatever it pleases with it's border. Who is going to stop them from refusing trucks at the Ambassador? They could easily decide the bridge is unsafe for a certain weight and refuse the traffic.

The Ambassador is not cost free either, requires maintenance and operating especially for such an old bridge. I don't see the undercutting game working out for them. Especially when they don't have a direct highway connection.

[Gistok]

^ Yes of course Canada can do what they want. But does that mean they are going to? Probably not.

The whole idea of a 2nd span was to unblock the slow traffic across the border. Moving all truck traffic to the Gordie Howe Bridge doesn't do that, because the problem is not the bridge so much as it is the huge quantity of trucks going thru Customs. By having 2 Customs crossings for trucks [and cars], that helps relieve the congestion problems by moving it to 2 locations, and speeding up truck deliveries.

Having 2 SEPARATE crossings for trucks between Detroit/Windsor has been the plan by the US and Canadian governments all along, although Matty Moroun thought otherwise.

[Richard]

Matty probably thought the same thing as the other private investors did with the new bridge,there is not going to be enough of a demand to support both bridges.

He is protecting his interests no different then anybody else is or would.

The question being is,if the trucker strike caused so much ruckus that the governor of Michigan claimed it was costing the state of Michigan billions because the flow of goods across the border was restricted,how come it was representatives in New York that brought up the changes needed in supplying enough customs agents in order to speed up the flow?

We have not heard anything from local and state representatives in that regards,unless it is convenient to have a slow down at the existing bridge in order to justify another one.

You could build 12 bridges if the bottle neck is at customs,you really are not solving anything and actually creating more problems by stretching the customs agents even thinner.

Thats how one on this side of the border can really throttle the new bridge,understaff the customs agents causing large back ups and forcing Canada back into your playground on your terms by exploiting the weak link.

It does not matter how much easy excess the freeway is,time is money.

The new bridge is more about Areo Park it actually has little to do with anything else,others are playing the long game.

It is going to be both the city of Detroit and Windsor that are going to suffer the consequences,it should be 2 cities pulling together for a common goal of survival in the future versus laser focused on the bridge.

The bridge is just a small but significant part in a much larger machine.

[Margaret's boy]

The ambassador bridge is over 90 years old. It wasn't designed to handle even a fraction of the traffic that flows between detroit and windsor even if we're in optimal condition. But the maroun family has been pretty tight fisted when it comes to doing regular maintenance and parts of the bridge are falling off.

[Richard]

The ambassador bridge is over 90 years old. It wasn't designed to handle even a fraction of the traffic that flows between detroit and windsor even if we're in optimal condition. But the maroun family has been pretty tight fisted when it comes to doing regular maintenance and parts of the bridge are falling off.

Bridges are designed figuring load capacities,the weight of the bridge to support itself came the expected weight of the vehicles traveling over it.

There was no weight limits on vehicles back in the 1920s so it was carrying the load of a heck of a lot more then it is now and like everything else it was over engineered.

The San Francisco Bay bridge,The Brooklyn Bridge at least 3 major span bridges across the Mississippi in downtown Minneapolis and many more that carry 5 times the daily traffic that the ambassador does are still being used and not designed to carry the loads of today,but they still do because they were designed to do that.

Tight fisted ?

They purchased properties in order to do the twin span,Windsor refuses to let them demolish them no matter how far run down they become because as long as there is a structure on there the city can charge the top end of the tax rate,$860,000 per year.

The city of Detroit would be basking in the life of Riley if they could collect $860,000 per year on the neighborhoods that are delict.

The duty free store is a joint venture with the university of Windsor so Windsor is not exactly getting the short end of the stick here.

It represents a large chunk of revenue yearly for that city also.

It’s not a matter of emotions,it’s plain and simple math.

Read the history on the bridge,it’s been a rocky road sense day one and a political football,the reason it exists is because 75% of the citizens of Detroit at the time voted for it to exist,as much as it pissed the mayor at that time off.

It has to be one of the most drama filled bridges in the history of the country.

[Danny]

The Morouns are Maroons right now. They will never win over the international bridge competition. Give it up.

[Richard]

Detroit is a city where “never say never” should be it’s motto,because as soon as somebody says something in never going to happen,somebody comes along and makes sure it does.

It was not to long ago when a lot of people were saying that Detroit would never come back as a city again,but yet here you are.

It does not matter what Canada thinks about it,all they have to do on the U.S side is allot 1 customs agent to the bridge and all bets are off.

The winds of politics change on both sides.

If the U.S. government actually cared about that bridge,they would have funded it,but as it stands they still have to answer to the U.S. taxpayers when it comes to the customs side of things,all they have to do is pander to the U.S. taxpayers and sideline the thing,the focus across both parties is on the southern border,that’s where the resources will be sent,the new bridge,nobody else cares about it even less will be willing to support it when they know the other option is the real free bridge.

Really,given the choice of having something that you can use but you have to pay taxes on it versus the same situation and using something that you do not have to pay taxes on,what do you think the rest of the country is going think?

What politician is going to stick their neck out on that one and fall in that sword,getting it built is the easy part.

99% of the rest of the country has no clue about a bridge in Detroit,until they have to start paying for it,it’s going to be a hard sell for Canada to convince millions in the rest of the country.

[Gistok]

^ The Canadians are paying for it... via bonds. All that the USA has to do is fund the Customs, and bridge users pay the bonds off.

[Satiricalivory]

^ Yes of course Canada can do what they want. But does that mean they are going to? Probably not.

The whole idea of a 2nd span was to unblock the slow traffic across the border. Moving all truck traffic to the Gordie Howe Bridge doesn't do that

It doesn't? Gordie Howe will be a much larger bridge, more lanes and direct highway access and larger customs. It could probably easily handle the entirety of the border truck traffic.

I can think of several other and much more important reasons this bridge is getting built than alleviating traffic.

[Richard]

^ The Canadians are paying for it... via bonds. All that the USA has to do is fund the Customs, and bridge users pay the bonds off.

The Canadians are not paying for it,they are fronting the up front costs for the state of Michigan who is also their partner,you still owe Canada for your part,it is not a free bridge.

The costs went from when you signed the agreement $2.8 billion to over $5 billion,if the traffic does not pay the note you are still on the hook for maintenance,$2.5 billion in building costs plus interest and the cost of staffing on the American side,plus any losses it incurs in the process.

What if it really only cost Canada the $2.8 billion and they just jacked it up to $5 billion in order to make it look like they are fronting the cost when it actually you are paying to have the whole bridge built.

And they get to collect the interest.

They had you at “Free bridge” they knew as soon as they threw the word free out there you would swallow it hook line and sinker.

Material costs have increased No different then everywhere else,even that $5 billion number does not even work anymore.

The orange guy that you hated so much was the one that approved the $15 million for the customs plaza that the one that you actually liked would not,so do not forget to send him a thank you note.

He could have stopped it dead in its tracks.

Yes more lanes increases the flow of traffic but yet the one thing that has not been provided yet to the 86,000 residents that will still be living near it and the 600,000 plus residents of the city of Detroit who are downwind of it the expected pollution levels that will come with the increase in traffic that it is expected to provide.

Interesting how every other project in the country has to provide that,but that bridge.

Are you wondering why the majority of the support for the bridge actually comes from politicians in Bloomfield county ?

One day in the future you will realize the real intent behind that bridge and the two city’s that bent over backward to help make it happen are the ones that will be suffering the most.

In the long game the intent is to remove Detroit and Windsor from the loop,economically and politically.

It has zero to do with wait times or customs plazas,they do not even play into the picture because they are no different then any other border crossing,it’s just the nature of the beast as they say.

Whats the difference then when you have to check in 3 hours before your international flight? And sit in the airport for 3 hours waiting.

[Gistok]

Oh Lordy... Richard I'm not getting into any more pissing matches with you with your word salad... [notice how others aren't either ].

And as far as the orange one goes... who cares?