Evaluation of Alternatives and Options for the City of Windsor Sam

Home , Ambassador Bridge

Evaluation of Alternatives and Options

For the City of Windsor Sam Schwartz Engineering PLLC January 2005

Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Overview of Presentation

C Background

C Evaluation of River Crossing Alternatives

C Recommended Crossing

C Alternative Connecting Roadways

5) Conclusion City : Overall Objectives

The current border crossings proposals were evaluated with regard for the following over-all objectives

C Solution must lead to strategic development and implementation of a coordinated and integrated transportation network that will serve as a platform for long-term and anticipated projected future demands.

C Development of a long-term border vision and strategy that goes beyond fixing short-term problems, not be reactive, and reflects increasing economic integration with the United States.

Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company City : Parameters

Alternatives must incorporate the following:

C Be least intrusive environmentally and socially C Consider the impact on existing neighborhoods, preserve the sense of community, and take into consideration proximity to residential, commercial and institutional uses C Provide for choice and a flexible integrated transportation network C Provide for redundancy C GET TRUCKS OFF CITY STREETS C Provide controlled access to link to Highway 401

Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Message I Received

C Seek a Utilitarian Solution • Greatest good for greatest number • Least harm to the fewest people • Individual interests respected but not reflected Work Process

C Reviewed background documents and data C Field observations C Met and/or phone conversations with proponents of river crossings and other strategies including ferry, rail and remote staging areas C Met with council and city engineers of Windsor C Met with Windsor, LaSalle, county, provincial and federal representatives C Met with various stakeholder groups and associations C Collected some new data Historical Context

The map tells the story - A mistake was made 50 years ago – Highway 401 ends 11 km from the Ambassador Bridge

Highway 401 Historical Context

Bi-National River Crossings with Direct Connections Background

C Heavy truck traffic and long queues on local streets: • Huron Church Road • Wyandotte Street • College Avenue

C Pedestrian and vehicular safety compromised by heavy truck traffic

C Significant Air Emissions and Noise Impacts

C Border delays will cost an estimated $17.8 billion/year by 2030*

* Bi-National Study , 2004 Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Background

Truck Queues 1000m (Tecumseh Rd.) or more on Huron Church Road

% of days queues 1000m or more

C Queues counted from College Ave. C 22-week survey from July 8- December 20, 2002 and reflects 6 available customs stations during survey C Maximum queue length of 5800 meters (Cabana Rd.) Source: MTO 2003 Background

C Traffic Volume and Capacity Analyses

• Volumes vs. Ambassador Bridge’s roadbed capacity • Volumes vs. custom stations’ capacity Background

Ambassador Bridge - USA Bound – Volumes vs. Roadbed Capacity *

* May 3rd 2004 – May 7th 2004 Background

Ambassador Bridge - USA Bound – Volumes/Capacity Ratio with One Lane Closed Background

Ambassador Bridge - USA Bound – Projected 2030 Roadbed Capacity Background

Ambassador Bridge - Projected Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service

Source: Bi-National Study for growth curve Background

USA Bound Weekday Truck Volumes* vs. Processing Capacity (9 Stations)

* May 3rd 2004 – May 7th 2004 Average Processing Rate = 2 minutes Background

USA Bound Weekday Truck Volumes* vs. Processing Capacity (13 Stations)

* May 3rd 2004 – May 7th 2004 Average Processing Rate = 2 minutes Background

USA Bound Projected 2030 Weekday Truck Volumes vs. Processing Capacity Background

USA Bound Projected 2030 Weekday Truck Volumes vs. Processing Capacity Bi-National Alternatives Relative Attractiveness of Alternatives for Trucks Assuming only one new river crossing is built

2010 Volumes

* In all other alternatives, other than the twinned Ambassador Bridge, it is assumed that some truck traffic would continue to use the Ambassador Bridge. Source: 2004 Study by the Bi-National Report Relative Attractiveness of Alternatives for Trucks Assuming only one new river crossing is built

2010 Volumes

2030 Volumes

Trucks remaining on Ambassador Bridge 2030

Source: 2004 Study by the Bi-National Report River Width at Crossing Alternatives

Source: 2004 Study by the Bi-National Report 2030 Traffic Level of Service – Existing and Proposed Crossings

Source: Bi-National Study South Crossing Corridor Geography

• Impacts sensitive marsh habitat and wildlife management program underway on Fighting Island. •Impact current residential, institutional and recreational land uses in Wyandotte,Riverview and LaSalle communities. West of river dominated by schools, churches and parks. •Approximately 4.2 miles (6.7km) to Interstate 75 from Detroit touchdown site Source: Bi-National Study Central Crossing Corridor Geography

•New bridge footprint on Canadian and U.S. sides would be in predominately industrial areas with minimum impact to local residences. • Approximately 1.3 miles (2 km) to Interstate 75 from Detroit touchdown site

Source: Bi-National Study Ambassador Twinning and DRTP Corridor Geography

•On Canadian side, new bridge would impact Sandwich Town, University of Windsor and downtown Windsor communities. •New bridge footprint would be adjacent to residential areas of Mexicantown (Detroit). •DRTP connection to I-75 would pass though Corktown Source: Bi-National Study East Crossing Corridor Geography

• Environmental impacts to Peche Ile or Belle Isle •Heavy residential and community impacts in Detroit, Gross Pointe Park and East Riverside •Approximately 2 miles (3.12 km) to Interstate 94 from Detroit touchdown site Source: Bi-National Study Bi-National Alternatives Summary

South and East Crossings were least attractive:

C Would draw fewest trucks C Wider river crossings C Pass through sensitive areas C Poor interstate access C Significant community issues C Fail capacity test

Leaving three alternatives for further study:

C DRTP C Central Crossing/ Mich-Can C Ambassador Twinning Alternatives - DRTP

Single Barreled Rail Tube 2 one lane truck tunnels

200m Residential Customs Plaza Impact Zone

4 New Bridges

Non FAST Truck Staging Area

4 New Traffic Signals Alternatives - DRTP

Typical DRTP Truck and Rail Tunnel Cross Section Looking Toward Detroit

Truck Tunnel

C Single lane tubes- 4.07m (13’-4”) wide and 4.38m (14’-4”) high. Rail Tunnel C Tunnel portion = 2.5 km (1.6 mi)

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP DRTP Rail Infrastructure Improvements

•Creation of high clearance tunnel capable of transporting double stacked trailers •Compatible with plans for rail rationalization

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP

Typical DRTP Truck Tunnel Cross Section looking toward Detroit

C Cattle Chute Design C No Shoulders are provided in Tunnel

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP Profile of DRTP Truckway vs. “Street Grade”

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP

Profile of DRTP Truckway from Dougall Ave to Highway 401 Alternatives - DRTP

DRTP Rail and Truckway Paths

C Rail passes under truckway between Tecumseh Road and College Avenue

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP

Proposed Section of DRTP truckway Looking towards Detroit

Sub-Standard Design: C No median shoulders on truckway C No median barrier on truckway Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP

Standard Cross Section

•Inside median shoulders and median barrier added Alternatives - DRTP

DRTP Section at E.C. Row and Dougall Ave. Interchange Alternatives - DRTP

Comparison of proposed and standard cross-sections

20 m (66 ft.)

27m (89 ft.)

34 m (112 ft.) Alternatives - DRTP

Unused Rail Bridge over Dougall Avenue Alternatives - DRTP

Dougall Avenue with DRTP Truckway Alternatives - DRTP

MaGuire Park - Holburn Street near Cabana Road East Alternatives - DRTP

MaGuire Park with proposed Truckway Alternatives - DRTP Assessment

Proposed Customs Plaza

C Noise and air emissions for adjacent residential neighborhoods C Concerns due to close proximity of trucks to houses on South Cameron Blvd

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP

South Cameron near Totten Street Alternatives - DRTP

South Cameron at Totten Street with proposed truckway and rail track Alternatives - DRTP

South Cameron at Totten Street with proposed wall Alternatives - DRTP

DRTP Connection from EC Row at Dougall Ave.

Drawing : Courtesy of Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives - DRTP

DRTP Connection from EC Row at Dougall Ave.

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Alternatives- DRTP

DRTP Connection from EC Row at Dougall Ave.

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project Traffic Simulation Files

The following traffic simulation videos present these scenarios:

C DRTP / E.C. Row / Dougall Avenue Interchange • DRTP built from river to E.C. Row only, 2015 • DRTP built from river to E.C. Row only, 2030 • DRTP built to Highway 401, 2030

C DRTP / Highway 401 Interchange • 2015 Phase 1 DRTP Built from River to E.C. Row Only, 2015

E.C. Row / Dougall Avenue/ DRTP Interchange DRTP Built from River to E.C. Row Only, 2030

E.C. Row / Dougall Avenue/ DRTP Interchange DRTP Built to Highway 401, 2030

E.C. Row / Dougall Avenue/ DRTP Interchange Alternatives - DRTP

DRTP and Highway 401- Phase 1

Base Image - Detroit River Tunnel Project DRTP / Highway 401 Interchange, 2015

Phase 1 2030 Traffic Demand – Existing and Proposed Crossings Alternatives – Ambassador Twinning and Parkway

Two Bridges: 4 Lanes in Each Direction

Parkway: 3 Lanes in Each Direction

8 lane section through Sandwich Town Fly-over Ramps at EC Row and 401

Customs Plaza / Staging Area Alternatives – Ambassador Twinning and Parkway

Looking North down the 10 km Parkway, this illustrates the dedicated proposed Parkway Route from the end of the 401 to E.C. Row with provisions for local access. Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Alternatives – Ambassador Twinning and Parkway

Looking North to Detroit. Under this scheme U.S. Customs would be located in Imageplaza area.courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Alternatives – Ambassador Twinning and Parkway

Sandwich Towne

Air and noise impacts to residents in 200m of CTC Parkway Alternatives- Mich-Can Bridge/E.C. Row Expressway Ext.

Image courtesy of Mich-Can International Bridge Company Alternatives- Mich-Can Bridge/E.C. Row Expressway Ext. C Central Crossing located at end of Prospect Avenue C Passenger and Commercial vehicles C Located 3 km (approximately 1.8 mi) southwest of Ambassador Bridge C Proposed 2 lanes in each direction C Mich-Can supports the proposed E.C. Row-Lauzon Extension as adequate means for truck access from Highway 401

Image courtesy of Mich-Can International Bridge Company Alternatives- Mich-Can Bridge/E.C. Row Expressway Ext. Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion

Fully Controlled Traffic Impacts on Long term use Access via 401 Local Streets and EC Row Ambassador (+) Full control (0) Reduction only in (+) 2 added lanes Twinning from 401 and EC local portions of in both directions – Row both Huron-Church Rd. Sufficient for long directions and Talbot Rd. term

DRTP (-) Fails South (-) Bottlenecks on (-) 1 added lane in bound w/ 3 traffic Dougall Ave. may each direction for signals to cause truck diversion trucks- Insufficient Highway 401; to Ambassador for long term Fails Northbound Bridge in Phase 1 Mich Can/E.C. (0) Full control (-) Dependent on a (+) 2 added lanes Row Expressway only from E.C. widened E.C Row; in both directions – Extension Row Major traffic Sufficient for long disruption in Windsor term Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion

Air and Noise Approach Toll Booth and Added Impacts in 200m Road Customs’ Impacts Redundancy Width

Ambassador (-) 1372 (-) Six to (+) Proposed (-) No Twinning residences and Eight Customs Facility in 33 commercial lanes industrial areas at businesses E.C. Row

DRTP (-) 1262 * (+) Two (-) Proposed (0) For trucks residences and lanes Customs facility b/t only 82 commercial Tecumseh Rd. and businesses Dougall Ave.

Mich-Can/ (-) 1039 (0) Four (0) Not Defined (+) Yes E.C. Row residences, 116 lanes Extension businesses Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion

Construction Consistency with Land Acquisition Time Frame Community Goals

Ambassador (0) 4 to 5 (-) Heavy impact to (-) 8 acquisitions Twinning years Sandwich community- and ROW not consistent expenditures needed

DRTP (0) 3-4 (-) Proposed route (+) Little if any years bisects city of Windsor- private lands not consistent needed for completion Mich-Can/ E.C. (0) 3-4 (-) E.C. Row-Lauzon (-) 35 acquisitions Row Extension years Ext. would add trucks and ROW to the E.C. Row expenditures thoroughfare-not needed consistent Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion

Summary of Serious Flaws

DRTP Ambassador Mich-Can / E.C. Row Bridge-Twinning Extension • No added redundancy • Lack of redundancy • Dependent on widened for cars • 8 lane highway E.C. Row to 8 -10 lanes • Poor traffic through Sandwich & new Lauzon Parkway performance Towne Extension • Limited capacity •6 lane highway •Major disruption to •1262* residences along Talbot Road Windsor traffic impacted and Huron Church •Safety compromised • Safety compromised Road •35 ROW takings • Not fully controlled •1372 residences •1039 residences impacted •Significant air and impacted noise impacts adjacent • Significant air and •Significant air and noise to route noise impacts in impacts adjacent to E.C. West Windsor •Another new crossing Row would be required Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion

Alternatives must incorporate the following:

C Consider the long-term objectives and not be reactive C Be least intrusive environmentally and socially C Consider the impact on existing neighborhoods, preserve the sense of community, and take into consideration proximity to residential, commercial and institutional uses C Provide for choice and a flexible integrated transportation network C Provide for redundancy C Get trucks off city streets C Provide controlled access to link to Highway 401

Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion Crossing Alternatives – Conclusion

Summary of Serious Flaws

DRTP Ambassador Mich-Can / E.C. Row Bridge-Twinning Extension • No added redundancy • Lack of redundancy • Dependent on widened for cars • 8 lane highway E.C. Row to 8 -10 lanes & • Poor traffic through Sandwich new Lauzon Parkway performance Towne Extension • Limited capacity •6 lane highway along •Major disruption to •1262* residences Talbot Road and Huron Windsor traffic impacted Church Road •Safety compromised • Safety compromised •1383 residences •35 ROW takings • Not fully controlled impacted •1039 residences impacted •Significant air and noise • Significant air and •Significant air and noise impacts adjacent to route noise impacts in impacts adjacent to E.C. Sandwich •Another new crossing Row wouldRed be = inherentrequired to the crossing itself Crossing Alternatives - Recommendations

C Touchdown location is in industrial areas in the City of Windsor and Detroit C Offers Redundancy for all vehicles C Narrow river width (0.6 - 0.75 km) negates need for in-water bridge support C Draws more commercial truck traffic than other alternatives except for Ambassador Bridge Twinning C Adequate capacity for beyond 2030 Crossing Alternatives – Access Options

Goals for Roadways linking Highway 401 and Crossing:

C Fully controlled access from Highway 401 C Minimize number of residences affected C Utilize industrial areas to the extent possible C Two lanes in each direction

C Context Sensitive Design Be Employed: • Cantilevered roadways and/or tunnels in residential areas • Tunneled portions under environmentally sensitive areas • Parkettes Crossing Alternatives – Roadway Examples

Context Sensitive Design Proposed 4-Lane Depressed Cross-Section with Multi-Lane Frontage Road Crossing Alternatives – Roadway Examples

Context Sensitive Design:

C Collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to roadway design C Reserves residential, aesthetic, historic and environmental resources

Grand Central Parkway - New York, NY: C Cantilevered service roads preserve residential area Crossing Alternatives – Roadway Examples Context Sensitive Design

Banff National Park Alberta

• Culverts and land bridges preserve “connectivity” between two areas of the park on either side of the Trans-Canada Highway Crossing Alternatives – Roadway Examples Context Sensitive Design

Porte Sainte – Marie - Québec , Canada: C Widened bridge structure with planting improves the quality of urban area Roadway Options

•All road options need to be fully “ ” by the public •These are schematic drawings and not fully engineered Option1: South Route

Tunneled section under residential area

4 lane – 2 way expressway

Fully controlled from Highway 401 Option 2:Central Route A

Potential Customs Plaza

Protection of Provincial Nature Reserve

Tunneled section under residential area Option 3: Central Route B

Protection for Provincial Nature Reserve

Tunneled section under residential area Option 4: North Route

Tunneled section under residential area Options One and Two

Roadway Options One and Two bisect LaSalle’s Planned Town Center District

Image courtesy of Town of LaSalle Windsor Bypass

Option 3 - Central Route B is Preferred Option

•Avoids Town of LaSalle’s Proposed Town Center •Bypasses Huron Church Road •Constructed with few impacts to private property •Context Sensitive Design can ameliorate some impact along Talbot Road (tunneled, cantilevered and/or parkettes) •Context Sensitive Design can mitigate impact on environmental areas Conclusion

C A new river crossing is needed by 2010-2015 C A decision must be made ASAP to meet the target date C Overall solution must be multi-modal and balanced and must satisfy demand beyond 2030 C This is a multi-billion dollar problem annually; we should not be afraid to THINK BIG C Context sensitive design must be used C Fast track construction techniques should be considered C An early action plan must proceed on ferry, rail and some highway segments to improve access to existing crossings and efficiency and safety of existing network