The Detroit-Windsor Bridge Expansion

THE DETROIT-WINDSOR BRIDGE EXPANSION

FEASIBILITY REPORT

THE BRIDGE EXPANSION GROUP

August 1, 2009

Members:

Ryan G. Todd

Mike Peres

Sheena Sharma

Christine Lepain

Faisal Rehman

1. Summary Page 2

2. Introduction Page 4

3. Feasibility Factors (1-5) Page 10

Section 1 Page 10

Section 2 Page 12

Section 3 Page 13

Section 4 Page 14

Section 5 Page 15

4. Alternatives Page 16

5. Conclusion Page 17

6. References Page 18

SUMMARY

The U.S and Canadian border crossing between the cities of Detroit and Ontario is the busiest international crossing in the country. One of the primary arteries across the Detroit River is the Ambassador Bridge. The Ambassador Bridge was erected in 1929 and has had a long and storied life. One the most famous stories revolve around the current owner of the bridge Manuel “Matty” Moroun. Moroun has the distinction of being one of only two independent bridge owners in the country. This Detroiter has grown a large reputation for flaunting his wealth and power with little regard for anyone who stands in his way.

The crossing at the Ambassador Bridge is an extremely important trade route between the two nations and can account for nearly $100 billion in trade each year. The traffic created by this enormous trade route became a huge area of concern in the last decade and Moroun set in motion a plan to build another bridge. The bridge is intended to be a six lane, cable-stayed design that will be built directly adjacent to the existing bridge. As the sole owner of the bridge, Moroun intends on funding the project with his own capital.

The project is not without a great deal of opposition though. Many in the area, including the Transportation authorities of both cities, local and state governments, and various private interest groups, do not want the span built.

In order to illuminate this situation thoroughly, our group, The Bridge Expansion Feasibility Group, has decided to investigate all of the dominating factors pertaining to the bridge construction in order to validate, or invalidate, its feasibility. Our group plans on accomplishing this goal by researching several key areas in relation to the bridge expansion. These areas include the legal, environmental, heritage, financial, and political aspects of the project. The research will also involve a look at competing projects that could be viable alternatives to the twin span expansion. Finally, this exploration will conclude with a summation of the findings and insight into how we feel this situation should be judged.

Our intent with this study is not to provide a persuasive argument with the express purpose of leading our readers to one opinion or another. Instead, we plan on trying to provide an objective point of reference in regards to the construction of a twin bridge span. The reference point can then be used as a tool to assist those who are otherwise uniformed.

INTRODUCTION

As North America’s busiest commercial border crossing, and as one of only two privately owned ones, it is no wonder that there is such controversy surrounding the Ambassador Bridge’s proposed expansion… nor is this the first time that there has been such controversy surrounding the construction of it.

In 1903, it was decided that there was a need for an international bridge but there was a lot of disagreement as to how and where it should be built. Some wanted it to be privately owned and some wanted it to be publicly funded. The steamboat and the railroad companies were competing for control of the fur trade industry and businesses and cities on both sides of the border clashed. As a result, an International Bridge Committee was formed in hopes that it could come up with a solution acceptable to everyone but they had little success. Actually, two private individuals are the ones who really deserve the credit for getting the Ambassador Bridge built. John Austin, the owner of a Detroit painting company, and Joseph Bower, a Detroit native and New York financer, were the persons who got Congress to approve the project and who got the competing industries, towns and cities to agree to jointly finance the project as shareholders. Bower also personally threw in $50,000 to get a referendum put to the voters after Detroit’s mayor, Johnny Smith, cast a veto on it back in 1924. It basically took 24 years of haggling before construction could begin but once it started, the project went quite well and the bridge was completed nine months ahead of schedule in November of 1929 [npr.org].

Bower decided to issue public stock in his company, the Detroit International Bridge Co., to help weather financial hardships caused by traffic reductions, which occurred during the Great Depression. His company survived during a time when many others folded and trade gradually increased until it became the main transit point for one-quarter of all trade between the United States and Canada. It wasn’t until in 1979 when Manuel “Matty” Moroun became involved, that the Ambassador Bridge became privately owned. Moroun, a trucking empire owner, bought out Warren Buffet who owned one-quarter of the publicly held stock and then he soon purchased what was left of the Detroit International Bridge Co. and privatized all of his holdings.

Today, more than 40% of all truck traffic between the United States and Canada or, more specifically, $100 billion of the $400 billion of total annual trade between the countries crosses at the Detroit/Windsor border [Forbes]. Figure 1, below, shows the actual number of trucks crossing at each border in the region.

Figure 1: Commercial vehicle traffic breakdown

Approximately 40,000 commuters and $323 million dollar worth of goods are carried across daily [Ambassador Bridge]. These numbers are staggering and with now Moroun fighting for his right to expand, many are concerned.

Some are concerned that due to the Bridge’s extreme importance to the North American economies, the bridge might become a terrorist target and that as a privately owned operation, there isn’t adequate security in place to ensure its safe-keeping. They feel that a government-run operation would be more secure. These groups that are advocating a publicly financed and operated border crossing are pushing for another bridge to be built about a mile downriver from the existing bridge. It would connect the Detroit Delray neighborhood north of Zug Island to an area on the Canadian side between the Canadian Salt Inc. plant and the Brighton Beach power plant. This crossing is referred to as the DRIC or the Detroit River International Crossing and it is speculated that it will cost between 1.5 and 3 billion dollars to construct.

Some are questioning whether or not local communities near the Ambassador Bridge will be adversely affected by the increased air and noise pollution of the potentially higher traffic volumes. The U.S. Coast Guard has recently issued an order to temporarily stop all further construction amid concerns relating to waterway clearances and reduced safety when navigating in the Detroit River, and the Federal Highway Administration is concerned that the proposed height of the new twin span will interfere with operations at the Windsor Airport. Other groups are concerned that historic buildings are being destroyed to make way for a new crossing plaza and Michigan’s Historic Preservation Office states that the proposed twin-span will “create an overwhelming visual distraction” an will “diminish the integrity” of the existing historic bridge [Detroit News]. There is opposition on all sides and then there is also the question as to whether or not there is really even a need for any additional border crossing capacity based on the decline in traffic following the 9-11 attacks.

Heightened security measures implemented and the recent economic downturn have greatly reduced traffic volumes. According to Crain research, 1.7 million fewer cars and trucks crossed the Ambassador Bridge in 2008 than in 2007. That's a 19 percent decline, and it mirrors a trend since 2001. Figure 2 is an actual breakdown of the hard numbers used to calculate this change.

AMBASSADOR BRIDGE TRAFFIC

Cars: 2007 5,649,619 | 2008 4,447,793 | Change (21.27%)
Trucks: 2007 3,398,745 | 2008 2,885,047 | Change (15.11%)
Buses/other: 2007 34,071 | 2008 16,465 | Change (51.67%)
Total: 2007 9,082,435 | 2008 7,349,305 | Change (19.08%)
Source: Public Border Operators Association

Figure 2: Traffic breakdown [Crain Research]

Despite these numbers, many public interest groups and government agencies on both sides of the border feel that traffic will again increase to the point where there is a need to support larger traffic volumes. Statistics provided by the Ambassador Bridge’s communication manager, Bill Schreck, show that this is the fourth period of flat growth at the crossing in the last 35 years and that these bursts and declines are cyclical. According to Transport Canada spokesman, Mark Butler, there will be another cycle by 2015 and traffic volumes will again jump. Based on these opinions and because there is strong evidence provided by parties from every side of the debate supporting the need, this feasibility report will make the assumption that an additional crossing capacity of some sort must be constructed.

In agreement with our assumption are the two camps involved with the bridge expansion. First, those who support the private bridge, who believe that it would be sheer lunacy to expect the taxpayers of Michigan and Canada to pick up the bill for another crossing - yet they also feel that the extra capacity that would result from a larger bridge would help rejuvenate struggling industries and create badly-needed new jobs in the region [New York Times]. With the public sector struggling now, would it would be right to impose an additional tax burden upon the people when there is another option available? Some feel that with the existing framework of feeder roads that is already in place, it only makes more sense to do improvements on the existing roads to accommodate the twin-span rather than creating new throughways. This would again ultimately save tax-dollars, as well as currently unaffected neighborhoods elsewhere. The local transportation authorities harbor the belief though, that an international crossing should be under the control of the two neighboring countries. Both the Canadian and the U.S. governments share great concern in being forced to comply with an individual bridge owner when national security issues are at stake.

These are questions and concerns that need to be examined in great detail and this feasibility report will sort through the facts to help answer the one big question at the heart of this whole modern debate

“Should Matty Moroun be allowed to continue to building the twin span or should the project be permanently kyboshed?”

It will break down various elements factoring into each concern and provide the information needed to make the educated choice – not a choice based on emotion.

Before further study can be done, the need it is imperative that a clear understanding as to exactly what the twin span is be established. It will be a six-lane, cable-stayed bridge, which will span the Detroit River just west of the current Ambassador Bridge. According to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), it will be 102.5 ft-wide and 6,200 ft-long [Today’s Trucking] and is planned for completion by 2013. This span will ultimately cost $1 billion dollars – not including additional connecting roads or improved custom facilities.

FEASIBILITY FACTORS

Section 1: Legal Aspects

A schism is being created among the civic, social and business groups all over Southwest Detroit by a new legal challenge of the Detroit River International Crossing in Federal court.

The lawsuit was filed in the Federal court in Washington D.C. by Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development, Citizens with Challenges, Detroit Association of Black Organizations, Mana de Metro Detroit, Mexican Patriotic Committee of Detroit, Detroiters for Progress and the Detroit International Bridge Co.

Grosse Pointe transportation magnate, Manuel Moroun, who is orchestrating this legal action, owns the bridge company and he opposes construction of a competing bridge because he considers its unfair government competition unwarranted by declining traffic. The lawsuit filed by the Detroit International Bridge Company states that the 3 billion dollar new bridge could siphon up to 75 percent of the Ambassador Bridge's traffic. The Ambassador Bridge’s twin span project finds a great deal of its opposition standing along side the DOT’s Detroit International River Crossing project. This project itself lacks all of its U.S. and Canadian approvals, which causes many problems.

The filed lawsuit strictly states that the Federal Highway Administration and its Lansing-based administrator for Michigan, James Steele, has failed to follow federal guidelines and instructions for the decision-making process and other laws when it gave approval to the DRIC project. Plaintiffs are suing for injunctive and other relief and the feds refuse to comment on the lawsuit.

Race was also a big factor in this lawsuit alleging that the DRIC process purposely eliminated largely white areas, such as Grosse Ile for potential bridge locations. Instead, the targeted were Hispanic and Black Delray communities. The claim was that these communities were sacrificed at the sole benefit of the predominantly white neighborhoods in downriver area and Windsor, Ontario.

The Detroit River International Crossing project (DRIC) includes many people that have a big part in the project whether it might be a positive or negative influence. The main person behind this project is Manuel “Matty” Moroun who is the owner of the Ambassador Bridge Company.