Editorial Subterfuge, Urban Village Delayed and Scaledown Windsor

Urban Village Delayed

Mayor Francis warned about speculating with regards to St. Clair College locating another campus in the urban village. Councillor Halberstadt offered some insight into the council discussions regarding a downtown campus of the University of Windsor. 

However, the councillor raised the issue of the RFP for the urban village, which the Mayor suggested be discussed at council’s next strategic planning session.  Councillor’s Ron Jones and Caroline Postma stated in the last municipal election that an RFP would be issued shortly – but one never has

Sooner, rather than later is what I suggest to city council.  If what Councillor Halberstadt says on his blog is true – I do not understand why financial incentives could not be offered to attract developers to the urban village. 

While it is commendable that efforts are being made to attract institutional uses for the land, years of study, not to mention taxpayer dollars were used to develop design guidelines for the land.

Why do we need to wait for a council strategic session to figure what to do with them?  We’ve got the plan – issue the RFP’s!

Editorial Subterfuge

I’m still trying to figure out where the Star’s editorial on Saturday came from.  The editorial board dismissed the Ambassador Bridge’s enhancement project and criticized the DRIC process for taking so long to determine the location of the new crossing.

But the article, in my opinion, was loaded with emotion and short on facts.

First, I refer you to the statement made by Joe Corradino, the U.S. Consultant team’s project manager, that  “the market won’t support three bridges.”

The editorial stated:

But a bigger problem is that the bridge’s enhancement project could change the business case for building a third crossing downriver, away from built-up areas. It could also change the business case for constructing a dedicated truck route like GreenLink…

What is the business case for a third crossing?  With traffic volumes decreasing to below their peak in the late 1990′s (at all border crossings in Ontario as I understand)  there is no financial business case for a third crossing, unless of course we’re talking about publicly subsidizing the operation of the crossing.

The statement that it could change the business case for the dedicated truck route is illogical – the 401 connection has to be made – whether it is Greenlink or not.  The Star is basing this statement on the premise that if a third crossing is not built, there will be no 401 connection - a statement not supported by one iota of fact.

The editorial continues:

There are serious environmental concerns with that kind of traffic flowing through the heart of a city and it is distressing to hear claims the Ambassador Bridge is freezing Windsor out of the environmental assessment process. It was also distressing to learn the Ontario government could order a stringent provincial EA but has failed to do so.

Environmental concerns could be addressed, save for the city’s failure to extend their Greenlink proposal to the foot of the Ambassador Bridge.  The city demonstrated that any environmental concerns regarding Huron Church Road could be addressed as they have for south Windsor through partial tunnelling and/or depressed roadways.  The Star is also aware that the company would financially support such an endeavour – if the city would bother to negotiate a solution.

As far as the bridge company “freezing” Windsor out of the environmental assessment process, as I understand, the City of Windsor could submit their response to the draft environmental assessment.  If they cannot – then the issue is with Transport Canada and not the Ambassador Bridge company. 

Additionally, if the Star is truly interested in investigative reporting they may wish to question why the City of Windsor does not meet with the corporation to discuss the enhancement project; to outline their concerns and hammer out a feasible solution.

Furthermore, Section 3  of the Environmental Assessment Act of Ontario  basically states that if another jurisdication is undertaking an EA, the Minister may dispense with the application of the Act to “facilitate the effective operation of the requirements of both jurisdictions.” 

The Star  conveniently overlooks this statement in the Draft Environmental Assessment Guidelines prepared by Transport Canada:

“Consultation with the Ontario Ministry of the Environment is also taking place, to ensure that federal EA requirements can be coordinated with any provincial EA requirements that may arise.”

But the final straw for me was the editorial board’s claim that “bureaucratic dithering” is placing the project in jeopardy.

Perhaps amnesia has also struck the Windsor Star because I’m almost certain it was Mayor Eddie Francis and council that submitted Greenlink at the 11th hour and 59th minute – thus requiring further environmental studies which Sandra Pupatello clearly stated would need to be done.  There is also the small technicality of federal legislation.

Surely the Windsor Star is not advocating that the Federal and Provincial governments forego environmental assessments while at the same time demanding that the Ambassador Bridge Company be held to a higher standard are they?

Then again, the city did hire David Estrin who launched a lawsuit against the Federal Government on behalf of the City of Hamilton for enforcing federal environmental legislation pertaining to the Hill Valley Expressway construction - which the City of Hamilton later proposed mediation.

Scaledown defends blogs

Fellow blogger Chris Holt of Scaledown Windsor was interviewed today on AM800. 

The anchor attempted to trap (poor choice of word)  lead Chris by stating that the other blogs in the city “feel at times” like “US style attack ads.” (at 1 min. 56 sec).   But Chris didn’t bite.  It is a tactic I’ve experienced at times when being interviewed – asking a question or making a point attempting to get you to agree.

It was an intentional criticism of other blogs morphed into an interview question.

But Chris rightly pointed out that Scaledown Windsor is its own “genre” of blog.  (The man is diplomatic isn’t he?)  For the record, I know Chris – and do appreciate the exchange of information and constructive dialogue regarding urban planning. 

Scaledown Windsor, in my opinion is a blog of planning ideas that must be made in unison with environmental considerations.   Other blogs are political commentary – offering opinion, information, debate and presenting the all important other side of the messaging emanating from City Hall. 

Blogs are an online version of a town hall meeting.  You get all types of personalities as well as opinion that I believe residents are intelligent enough to understand – they are free to accept all or part or reject arguments made.

So kudo’s to Chris for recognizing the difference.

The interview is below: