new blog about Matty Moroun

[BShea]

You have not witnessed in your own home, as I have, the increase in grit and and grime since the trucks began to come trough the neighborhood in huge numbers

That's a needle in a stack of needles. MDOT's Gateway project is supposed to alleviate some of that issue, no? I'm looking right now at MDOT paperwork that says Gateway was designed with the second span in mind, and that the new interchange would improve air quality.

And it strains logic to the point of laughter to look at SW Detroit, and the yellow air from hundreds of factories, and think trucks at the bridge are but a tiny percentage of that.

I also assume you oppose DRIC, which will bring more trucks about a mile away, no? If one were truly worried about diesel particulate, then one would oppose entry of all trucks into any portion of SW Detroit. Or is it a case of one area's residents are more worthy of saving than others? NIMBY? The bridge sites are so close as to make NIMBY an empty position.

In the end, more trucks and diesel particulate isn't a Moroun or MDOT issue. It's a trade issue. The trucks are coming and that has nothing to do with who owns the infrastructure over the water.

And FYI, I live in downtown Detroit, and I lived six years within sight of the Blue Water Bridge, which stands as a monument to complete and utter government mismanagement of a bridge.

[urbanoutdoors]

Bill,
I do not know what document you are looking at but it seems that MDot may be sending contradicting information if that is the case. I am attatching a letter that Mdot sent to the coast gaurd they seem to be saying that although it was put in place to aleviate truck traffic from residential streets it was in no way assuming that there was to be a second span and was being constructed to be adapted to if there was or wasn't a second span built. Especially becuase the DIBC was not forthcoming with information...
Click on the docket go to page 5 and look at mdot's comments to see the full 6 page adobe... The EPA's are quite intersting as well for those who are interested...

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspubli...0000648091cc53

[BShea]

They very much have put out conflicting messages. The stuff I have dates back to the 1990s and early 2000s and acknowledges the Gateway would feed into a DIBC project to add a second span. MDOT knew what was coming and it would have been incredibly irresponsible for any government agency anywhere to construct such a project without planning for something like the second span.

I cannot fathom someone saying something like, "This Gateway thing, we're gonna build it without taking into account the second span traffic you've said will be coming."

I guess maybe I can fathom that. Which is sad. For MDOT or anyone else to suggest Gateway is completely divorced from a second span is absurd. Of course, this is the same agency whose ineptitude is about to destroy a good chunk of Port Huron's tax base thanks to a $500 million parking lot needed since the 1997 plaza was constructed too small, even for the time.

[SWMAP]

Bill: the air in SW Detroit was noticably better after the Feds made the pollution producers put in smokestack pollution devices. I tell you from a first-person experience that air quality has since diminished considerably - and its because of the trucks belching deisel particulates. Its clear when dusting and cleaning what is being picked up. I believe that many trucks will use the DRIC, thus making the deposits less concentrated. I am opposed to the doubling of the lanes of the DIBC. I am opposed to having Mr. Moroun run unchecked. I am opposed to having the only bridge option be a privately-owned bridge. I want a government-owned bridge that is answerable to the citizens for its pollution, its upkeep, etc.

By the way, have you observed the Ambassador Bridge up close lately? Talk about the old "demolition by neglect!" The Bridge used to be painted and polished and rust kept at bay every summer. But not for a few years now. I'm going to write to the governor because I believe that the DIBC is purposely neglecting upkeep to add some credibilty to their claims that the bridge is obsolete. I remind you again that the Bridges into Manhattan are of the same or earlier eras and they are doing just fine. But, of course, basic maintenance is required.

[kraig]

Michigan Air Emissions Reporting System
Annual Pollutant Totals Query Results

The results of your query are displayed below. Click on a pollutant column heading to sort.
Click on a facility name to see the location and a description of the processes at that facility.
55 results matched your criteria
Facility InformationYearAnnual Pollutant TotalsCO
[[tons)NOX
[[tons)PM10
[[tons)PM2.5
[[tons)PM
[[tons)SO2
[[tons)VOC
[[tons)Pb
[[tons)MARATHON ASHLAND PETROLEUM
SRN: A9831 - City: DETROIT2004408.021060.15172.136.15-579.2535.950
That's 2,761.6 tons of combined air pollution. That's 5,523,200 pounds of combined air pollution, 12,300 of which were PM2.5 particles alone in 2004. Granted, this was 2004 and there was probably a drop off in 2005 [[hopefully). But, I think you had more people getting sicker from the petroleum plant than from the trucks going to canada. If you had that much pollution coming from the trucks, you wouldn't be able to see you're hand inches away from your face. Moroun is shady, but identifying the real problem is what's going to provide real solutions.

[SWMAP]

So, Kraig, is your observation "But, I think you had more people getting sicker from the petroleum plant than from the trucks going to canada. If you had that much pollution coming from the trucks, you wouldn't be able to see you're hand inches away from your face. " a scientist's observation - or an apologist's observation? I mean, what is the basis for your deduction. How many people live under the Marathon Petroleum Plant, for instance and how much of that tons of pollution land in their houses.

[BShea]

Again, if you question any criticism of Moroun, you're an agologist ... even though the trucks have nothing to do with Moroun.

And with truck and car traffic DOWN at the border, how is it that the air is yellow?

The air isn't yellow at the Buffalo crossings.

Me isn't a scientist, but methinks the massive amount of industry in the area might have something to do with it.

More trucks are coming. More crossing capacity will be needed, likely more than DRIC and DIBC combined at some point. That's neither the fault of Moroun of MDOT. That's trade.

[SWMAP]

Well, I think you said that the air is yellow. I never said that - and I don't think that it is yellow. Additionally, the trucks do have everything to do with maroun - and he wants more of them.

I did tell you that smokestack emmissions are highly regulated and after that regulation, air quality in SW Detroit improved until the trucks started to pile up.

The Buffalo crossing has significantly less traffic ingeneral and fewr truck crossings. Or so I have heard.

[urbanoutdoors]

Again, if you question any criticism of Moroun, you're an agologist ... even though the trucks have nothing to do with Moroun.

And with truck and car traffic DOWN at the border, how is it that the air is yellow?

The air isn't yellow at the Buffalo crossings.

Me isn't a scientist, but methinks the massive amount of industry in the area might have something to do with it.

More trucks are coming. More crossing capacity will be needed, likely more than DRIC and DIBC combined at some point. That's neither the fault of Moroun of MDOT. That's trade.

Bill,
The problem is theat now instead of those trucks going directly on the freeways they are going on local roads and to Mattys truck depot on toledo or flying down fort, clark or WGB.
Do you forget that trucking is what got him his empire....

So to say Matty has nothing to do with trucks doesn't work as an argument for me.... I understand what you mean in that bridges are there own entity, but because of morouns design changes he has made it worse than it would have been if he just let things go on as Mdot planned...

[BShea]

The problem is theat now instead of those trucks going directly on the freeways they are going on local roads

I get that, and agree that the trucks need to be off the streets as the Gateway and second span plans call for, but I'm talking bigger picture in general. Traffic will increase and [[assuming the trucks are where they're supposed to be) that means there's going to be more crap in the air ... but that amount of crap is insignificant compared to the other nastiness in SW Detroit's air.

The feeling I'm getting is that Moroun is getting blamed for having trucks at all in SW Detroit and that's just silly. There are going to be lots of idling trucks at both bridges. It's just the way things are, and will be until they invent effective exhaust-free engines for trucks.

[Gsgeorge]

You know, none of this stuff about air quality vs commerce would matter if the auto industry would start making these things so they run on hydrogen, water, or batteries.

Don't tell me it can't be done.

Man runs a car on water

[kraig]

So, Kraig, is your observation "But, I think you had more people getting sicker from the petroleum plant than from the trucks going to canada. If you had that much pollution coming from the trucks, you wouldn't be able to see you're hand inches away from your face. " a scientist's observation - or an apologist's observation? I mean, what is the basis for your deduction. How many people live under the Marathon Petroleum Plant, for instance and how much of that tons of pollution land in their houses.

It's a common sense observation. The freeway is about 20 to 30 feet below the street, the stacks on the petroleum plant are taller than a lot of apartment buildings. We've all observed the smoke coming from the stacks. If you had that much smoke coming from below the street it would be far more than what you get from trucks. I don't think recognizing that makes me an apologist, I think not recognizing shows more bias on your part. Additionally, I don't think I'm being an apologist for observing that a petroleum plant, please remember what petroleum is used for, is going to produce more pollution than trucks. You appear to be mad at me for pointing out that elected and public officials can be just as shady, and less competent, than business people. What's up with that?

[SWMAP]

Well, you are an apologist! You say:"The freeway is about 20 to 30 feet below the street, the stacks on the petroleum plant are taller than a lot of apartment buildings. We've all observed the smoke coming from the stacks. If you had that much smoke coming from below the street it would be far more than what you get from trucks. I don't think recognizing that makes me an apologist, "

The smokestacks, with regulated emission controls are high in the sky. Their limited emmissions dissipate over a large area of SW Detroit and Windsor. On the other hand, the truck area, while below ground as you say, is covered for several miles with trucks and those are 10 feet tall or more. Truck emmissions dissippate at ground level in a very restrictedarea. You also don't account for the rogue trucks that are running up and down our streets because they want to move faster than the allowed truck routes.

The original question by Bill Shea was that he wanted to know where our concern about trucks causing cancer came from. He ridiculed it - but its a very real and scientifically-based concern. The Ambassador Bridge is in a living neighborhood. The DRIC enterprise is is planned for a near no-man's land. let it happen. Mr. marioun should keep what he has and let's have another bridge with more public control - and save a fine neighborhood, as well.

[kraig]

Well, you are an apologist! You say:"The freeway is about 20 to 30 feet below the street, the stacks on the petroleum plant are taller than a lot of apartment buildings. We've all observed the smoke coming from the stacks. If you had that much smoke coming from below the street it would be far more than what you get from trucks. I don't think recognizing that makes me an apologist, "

The smokestacks, with regulated emission controls are high in the sky. Their limited emmissions dissipate over a large area of SW Detroit and Windsor. On the other hand, the truck area, while below ground as you say, is covered for several miles with trucks and those are 10 feet tall or more. Truck emmissions dissippate at ground level in a very restrictedarea. You also don't account for the rogue trucks that are running up and down our streets because they want to move faster than the allowed truck routes.

The original question by Bill Shea was that he wanted to know where our concern about trucks causing cancer came from. He ridiculed it - but its a very real and scientifically-based concern. The Ambassador Bridge is in a living neighborhood. The DRIC enterprise is is planned for a near no-man's land. let it happen. Mr. marioun should keep what he has and let's have another bridge with more public control - and save a fine neighborhood, as well.

So, are you telling me that a petroleum plant is putting out less pollution than the trucks?

[SWMAP]

So, are you telling me that a petroleum plant is putting out less pollution than the trucks?

The Marathon plant is about 5 miles from my house. It has controlled emmissions.The trucks are about 200 feet and closer at times. Their emmissions are known to cause cancer and heart problems.

[kraig]

The Marathon plant is about 5 miles from my house. It has controlled emmissions.The trucks are about 200 feet and closer at times. Their emmissions are known to cause cancer and heart problems.

That's not answering the question. I don't blame you, you've already cornered yourself by even alluding to the Marathon Plant producing less pollution than the trucks. If you can see the plant smoke from 5 miles away, it's a safe bet that it's more pollution than a truck 200 feet away. By the way, the trucks emissions are controlled too.

[kraig]

Bill,
I do not know what document you are looking at but it seems that MDot may be sending contradicting information if that is the case. I am attatching a letter that Mdot sent to the coast gaurd they seem to be saying that although it was put in place to aleviate truck traffic from residential streets it was in no way assuming that there was to be a second span and was being constructed to be adapted to if there was or wasn't a second span built. Especially becuase the DIBC was not forthcoming with information...
Click on the docket go to page 5 and look at mdot's comments to see the full 6 page adobe... The EPA's are quite intersting as well for those who are interested...

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspubli...0000648091cc53

Check out MDOT's newsletter from august 2007

Q: MDOT has taken on many projects in metropolitan Detroit and
throughout the state. What is the significance of the Ambassador Bridge
Gateway Project?
A: The project includes two interstate freeways and improves access to the
#1 U.S.–Canada commercial crossing that carries 23 percent of all surface
trade between the two countries. The Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project
will relieve congestion/trucks on adjacent surface streets in Detroit’s Mexicantown community and provide
access to the Detroit Mexicantown International Welcome Center and Mercado. The largest phase of
construction, Phase 4, will get underway this summer to complete freeway reconstruction and access
improvements to the community and the Ambassador Bridge. It is the largest single construction contract
that MDOT has ever undertaken in any part of the state. It is the culmination of nearly 14 years of planning
and design, representing an investment for this phase alone of about $170 million. Total cost of all phases
of the project when complete will be more than $230 million.
Q: What improvements will be made as a part of this phase of the project?
A: During Phase 4, sections of I-75 and I-96 will be reconstructed and a new interchange will be built. This project will enhance
safety and decrease traffic congestion in the Mexicantown community while improving access to and from the Ambassador Bridge
plaza. One of the most exciting elements of the project is the new state-of-the-art pedestrian bridge that will be built over I-75 and
I-96 to connect the east and west sides of Mexicantown. It will have some unique design elements and be the first bridge of its kind
to be built in Michigan.
Q: Is there a connection between this project and efforts to build a new bridge?
A: This project will provide direct access from the Ambassador Bridge to adjacent freeways with new highway and ramp
reconstruction, and provide access to the new Detroit Mexicantown International Welcome Center and Mercado. As is typical with
highway studies and design, the facilities will be built to accommodate expected future growth. The Detroit International Bridge
Company is responsible for the design and reconstruction of the plaza as part of the project, but a new bridge is not part of the
Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project.
Q: What is the difference between the Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project and the Detroit River International
Crossing Study [[DRIC)?
A: The ABGP has been underway for several years and its purpose is to improve the flow of traffic at the busiest border crossing in
North America. The purpose of the current phase of the DRIC is to reach a decision regarding the type and location of a possible
new Detroit River crossing. Both are focused on serving future needs between the United States and Canada in the Detroit -
Windsor trade corridor.


As you can see, while stating that a second span was not a part of the Gateway project, the state did acknowledge that the facilities were built with an expectation of future growth. Remember, the DIBC has been saying a whole lot longer than 2 years that they were looking to build another span, all the state did was defer that question to the DIBC, which they should have, but they knew.

[SWMAP]

"Future growth" is undefined and unqualified in the exhibit you present.
It may merely mean future growth in truck and passenger car volumes- and that is more likely than growth in the Bridge. In that case, the wording would more likely have been something like "future expansion."

[kraig]

"Future growth" is undefined and unqualified in the exhibit you present.
It may merely mean future growth in truck and passenger car volumes- and that is more likely than growth in the Bridge. In that case, the wording would more likely have been something like "future expansion."

The answer as far as future growth was the state's response to the direct question about another bridge. I understand you not understanding, you're not familiar with answers that actually respond to the question being asked.

[BShea]

The MDOT document, the Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program outline, I have says this:

"Design will accommodate the proposed future second span of the Ambassador Bridge."

Can't be much more clear than that. The MDOT text above from Kraig is correct, the Gateway doesn't include a bridge. But it was designed to reflect a second span.

That is fact.

[kraig]

Windsor's worst crime of all against taxpayers from coast to coast? Fighting the "nine point plan" Ontario's top traffic experts unveiled in 2003 to fix the border mess that developed after 9-11.
Had good sense reigned at city hall -- unlikely, given council's history -- half the mess would have been solved by now at a cost of only $300 million borne by senior levels of government.
Instead it will cost all Canadians five times that much to build the DRIC road which will wipe out dozens of businesses and hundreds of jobs and millions in tax assessment. And Windsor will still have to pay eventually to widen Lauzon and E.C. Row.
That is, if anyone still wants to do business in this "I'm Against It" city.
© Copyright [[c) The Windsor Star


Let's keep expecting public officials on both sides to get things right. After all, it works out so well.

[ruxy17]

anyways.....

softball game?