The DRIC: A pressure tactic?

That’s how a story in the National Post reads.

Though, to be honest, I had my doubts the Government of Canada would go to such an extent as Windsor City Blog has been stating in his blogs, but he seems to have been on to something.

The National Post reports that federal officials in Ottawa have been mulling purchasing the Ambassador Bridge:

Stephen Harper has instructed his ministers to explore the prospect of buying the Windsor-Detroit bridge — the busiest international border crossing in North America — from its American owner.

But the paragraph that really caught my attention was the following:

One insider said the government has approached Mr. Moroun in the past and been told the asking price is $3-billion — roughly twice the government’s valuation.

However, the government received environmental approval for the new Detroit River International Crossing in December and the Ambassador Bridge’s annual $60-million toll revenue would be badly hit if the new crossing was built. It has been estimated that it would take an estimated 75% of the truck traffic that uses the existing bridge. That prospect may persuade Mr. Moroun to take another look at any federal offers to buy the Ambassador.

One of the questions I have had, as regular readers will know, is why hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on the US side improving connections to freeways to improve capacity and traffic flow and yet spending tens of millions pursuing an additional crossing downriver that will take away 75% of the traffic!

What doesn’t make sense is Transport Canada spokesperson, Mark Butler’s comment:

“The government remains committed to the building of a new (DRIC) bridge between Windsor and Detroit, as additional capacity is needed along this corridor to support the anticipated growth in broader [sic] traffic.”

Let’s think logically for a moment about that statement.

Even at $3-billion – the Ambassador Bridge plus $1-billion for a second span just west of the existing structure is comparable to the the costs of the W.E. Parkway and a new bridge and plaza 2 kilometers downriver.  Throw in upgrading Huron Church north of EC ROW and we arrive at around $5-billion -  depending upon whether this section is at or below grade.

By the DRICS’s own admission, a new crossing downriver could siphon up to 75% of traffic from the Ambassador Bridge and logically, it wouldn’t be any different  whether Mr. Moroun or the Government of Canada owned the crossing. 

It would have a significant impact upon revenue generation.

So why build a new crossing downriver if the Government is seriously considering purchasing the Ambassador Bridge?

Second, is CBSA’s comment in the Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan as highlighted in a blog I had written in November 2008:

“The Customs Plaza at the east end of the bridge was recently expanded. The Canadian Border Services Agency has informed the CTC and the City that a much larger inspection plaza is required to accommodate both the current and proposed new bridge operations. One area being contemplated for these facilities is the residential land to the south of the current bridge.”

The key words here are “current…operations.”

And from letters between the CBSA and the Ambassador Bridge Company, (available on the Partnership Border Study website) it seems that the bridge company is arguing against an expanded plaza.

“Based on the work so far, it is becoming clear that our long-term needs cannot be addressed without expanding the plaza, most probably to the south and to the west, in the future…Bottom line is that more planning is needed to address the current and long-term border management needs at the Ambassador Bridge.”

The Gateway Project on the US side has been designed to accomodate a second span.  CBSA is stating  the current plaza doesn’t meet their needs now, or in the future and requires expanding.

The National Post claims that “in the past” the Government had approached the company, though how long ago in the past is really the question.  But at some point the company was asking $3-billion.  

A little too rich by this story’s account.

Which leaves  the question – was the DRIC an excercise to force Mr. Moroun to sell at a lower price?   

“That prospect may persuade Mr. Moroun to take another look at any federal offers to buy the Ambassador.” 

Were these the words of the ‘insider?”  If so, it lays the government strategy bare - which doesn’t make any sense to me.

Or does the government see the writing on the wall?

That writing being years – perhaps even upwards of a decade as history has shown - of legal wrangling and expensive court battles.  The ones receiving all the attention right now are just the warning shots from both sides – the real battles, I suspect, are yet to come.

So is the Government waving the white flag and publically stating they’re ready to negotiate a price?

I don’t know – but the story doesn’t make sense.  It seems to make a mockery out of the entire DRIC process considering the accumulating costs and mounting legal challenges which were not unexpected.

The Ambassador Bridge site was primarily rejected for consideration (on the Canadian side) of a second span because the DRIC claimed it required a massive plaza, but the CBSA is claiming an expanded plaza is still needed to meet the needs now and in the future. 

But the DRIC assessment from 2005 stated (PDF p. 113):

The existing plaza is bounded on the south by the Essex Terminal Rail right-of-way, and on the east by the University of Windsor campus. Therefore, a proposal for the expansion of the existing plaza was developed to the west side of the existing structure.

While having the plaza sized appropriately to allow border agencies to carry out all border processing functions and inspections at the foot of the bridge is highly desirable for the border agencies, a plaza surrounded by a residential area is not desirable.

And with respect to the access road from EC ROW to the Ambassador Bridge, the same DRIC assessment stated:

Expanding Huron Church Road to a freeway to the Ambassador Bridge has less overall impact than a new freeway corridor to the Ambassador Bridge. While using the Huron Church corridor provides a lower benefit to regional mobility and carries greater constructability concerns, the lower impacts to the community were considered of greater importance in determining which alternative to carry forward as the connecting route to the Ambassador Bridge.

So it doesn’t take any stretch of the imagination to speculate the DRIC could simply become the Ambassador Bridge’s enhancement project – it just simply means more study on the part of the DRIC would be required to address the “constructability” concerns and to address community impacts as they have done with the W.E. Parkway.

And even if the redundancy argument is still valid – the government would still require the funds through tolls to make continued operations at the Ambassador Bridge feasible along with the  plaza expansion – which would be difficult I would think with 75% less traffic.

The National Post story reminds me of a blog I had written nearly three years ago regarding Manufacturing Consent:

…the purpose of manufacturing consent is to create numerous possibilities with the objective of implementing the preferred, usually most unpopular “possibility.” Ultimately, the goal is to make the unpopular the popular option. This is to say, obfuscate the issue and gradually implement the preferred option.

Is that what this excercise has really been all about? 

If so, we have wasted years of precious time when purchasing the Ambassador Bridge has been an option all along – considering the costs are comparable to what has been proposed by the DRIC in the first place.

 

Municipal Day Care: Request for Deferrals

“Santos said when the county was considering an amalgamation of public and private land ambulance services, the city requested a delay on a decision until other options were reviewed. The county, which operates the joint emergency medical services, agreed to the request, said Santos.

Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis, who chaired Thursday’s waste management meeting, said he attempted to get city council to defer a decision on the fate of Tecumseh and Amherstburg daycares, but wasn’t successful” (Windsor Star, February 5, 2010).

________________________________________

That is quite a narrow interpretation of what actually happened Monday night. 

Despite involving himself in every aspect of the debate; the Mayor’s attempt to have the matter split – in comparison to his previous interventions at council (such as stepping down from the Chair to lecture council during the Junction debate) – was very weak.

Asking a question of a delegate is not, in my opinion, attempting to get city council to defer the item.

In fact, given the Mayor’s statements throughout the evening, consulting county council was not necessary since, to his recollection, they had been already consulted.

But throw fellow councillor members under the bus when it is politically advantageous to do so, or frankly seeking to conduct significant damage control.

As you will see below, there was a 30-day request for deferral presented by Councillor Lewenza towards the end of the evening in addition to the prior motion to defer.

On that motion, Councillor Lewenza made a fatal error in accepting Councillor Hatfield’s amendment to consult everyone but the Queen of England. 

In that motion, Councillor Hatfield thought it would be a wonderful idea to consult with the opposition parties at the provincial level.