AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Detroit Bridge Wars  (Read 89366 times)

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 53
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Detroit Bridge Wars
« on: June 16, 2009, 05:35:15 PM »

US Government approval of the privately-owned Ambassador Bridge was apparently revoked recently.

This project is apparently in competition with a proposed bridge further down the Detroit River.

See US Gov freezes permitting for new span of Ambassador Bridge Detroit-Windsor for more information.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2010, 06:19:14 PM by mightyace »
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

Stephane Dumas

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1714
  • Last Login: Today at 07:31:16 AM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2009, 08:40:11 PM »

I wonder what they'll do now with the new approach planned for the future Ambassador bridge?
Logged

Hellfighter

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1209
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Livonia, Detroit, MI
  • Last Login: July 30, 2010, 01:48:02 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2009, 12:30:01 AM »

Here's an article explaining the many problems that the government, both national and local, are having with the bridge company. The root of the whole issue is that the bridge company acts like it's a part of the federal government.
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2009, 07:59:01 PM »

No big surprise.  Dictator Lucifer Obama wants the government to control everything and wants to squash free enterprise.  Now why would he allow private ownership of a bridge that would compete with his bigger government producing span?
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #4 on: June 17, 2009, 11:21:05 PM »

Deride it if you will, but that "bigger government producing span" will have one huge advantage:  it'll provide a direct freeway connection between I-75 and ON 401 that doesn't involve a 60 mile trip up to Port Huron.  That alone makes it a worthy pursuit...

One would think that a freeway connection on the Canadian side of the Ambassador could have been done long ago.  That being said, why would the US govt now be trying to pull the plug on the twinning of the Ambassador if their bridge and connections are so superior?  Why?  Because Obama and his stooges are control freaks who are doing everything in their power to destroy capitalism and impose communism on us.  Control the banks, control the auto industry, control healthcare, control transportation and control the border crossings.  I'd say that's a pretty good start.
Logged

Hellfighter

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1209
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Livonia, Detroit, MI
  • Last Login: July 30, 2010, 01:48:02 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #5 on: June 18, 2009, 12:46:57 AM »

No big surprise.  Dictator Lucifer Obama wants the government to control everything and wants to squash free enterprise.  Now why would he allow private ownership of a bridge that would compete with his bigger government producing span?

Actually, you should direct your blame on the bridge company. They are the ones who start construction on other people or municipalities properties without any consent. They started building on riverside park, which is still property of the city of Detroit. The downriver bridge is an alternative plan, and it's only a plan. That's in case the bridge company is resistant to all efforts at a compromise. It's like the whole deal with Cobo hall. They'll try to settle the bridge dispute before letting the government build a bridge.
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #6 on: June 18, 2009, 10:28:55 AM »

No big surprise.  Dictator Lucifer Obama wants the government to control everything and wants to squash free enterprise.  Now why would he allow private ownership of a bridge that would compete with his bigger government producing span?

Actually, you should direct your blame on the bridge company. They are the ones who start construction on other people or municipalities properties without any consent. They started building on riverside park, which is still property of the city of Detroit. The downriver bridge is an alternative plan, and it's only a plan. That's in case the bridge company is resistant to all efforts at a compromise. It's like the whole deal with Cobo hall. They'll try to settle the bridge dispute before letting the government build a bridge.
After reading the article it looks like all parties are to blame and no one seems to know who is running the show.  Typical.
Logged

Hellfighter

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1209
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Livonia, Detroit, MI
  • Last Login: July 30, 2010, 01:48:02 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #7 on: June 18, 2009, 03:08:05 PM »

No big surprise.  Dictator Lucifer Obama wants the government to control everything and wants to squash free enterprise.  Now why would he allow private ownership of a bridge that would compete with his bigger government producing span?

Actually, you should direct your blame on the bridge company. They are the ones who start construction on other people or municipalities properties without any consent. They started building on riverside park, which is still property of the city of Detroit. The downriver bridge is an alternative plan, and it's only a plan. That's in case the bridge company is resistant to all efforts at a compromise. It's like the whole deal with Cobo hall. They'll try to settle the bridge dispute before letting the government build a bridge.
After reading the article it looks like all parties are to blame and no one seems to know who is running the show.  Typical.

True, but the bridge company instigated the whole problem.
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #8 on: June 18, 2009, 11:34:26 PM »

No big surprise.  Dictator Lucifer Obama wants the government to control everything and wants to squash free enterprise.  Now why would he allow private ownership of a bridge that would compete with his bigger government producing span?

Actually, you should direct your blame on the bridge company. They are the ones who start construction on other people or municipalities properties without any consent. They started building on riverside park, which is still property of the city of Detroit. The downriver bridge is an alternative plan, and it's only a plan. That's in case the bridge company is resistant to all efforts at a compromise. It's like the whole deal with Cobo hall. They'll try to settle the bridge dispute before letting the government build a bridge.
After reading the article it looks like all parties are to blame and no one seems to know who is running the show.  Typical.

True, but the bridge company instigated the whole problem.
Possibly, if you can believe the press anyway.  I'm not sure about the credibility of either source.
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #9 on: June 19, 2009, 06:52:27 PM »

I've gotta wonder, given the terrible economic situation both countries are facing and the fact that you now need a passport to travel to Canada, why any bridge is even being considered now since obviously far fewer people will be traveling back and forth between the 2 countries.
Logged

Hellfighter

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1209
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Livonia, Detroit, MI
  • Last Login: July 30, 2010, 01:48:02 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2009, 06:55:24 PM »

The truck traffic will greatly benefit from another bridge. That was mostly the reason the whole time.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 37
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2009, 11:22:58 PM »

indeed.  all major highway projects are primarily designed with truck traffic in mind.  the fact that the occasional passenger vehicle uses the road too is completely incidental to its purpose.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #12 on: June 20, 2009, 11:22:33 AM »

indeed.  all major highway projects are primarily designed with truck traffic in mind.  the fact that the occasional passenger vehicle uses the road too is completely incidental to its purpose.
Well I have to disagree with this statement since many highways ban or restrict truck useage, have separate truck routes and/or lower speed limits for trucks.  Some routes such as I-94 between Chicago and Detroit were obviously designed to carry a lot of truck traffic while on others you'd be hard pressed to ever see a truck.  But the point is, the bad economy is going to reduce (and no doubt has already reduced) truck traffic too, so the timing of this seems a bit odd.
On the flip side of that, the economy isn't going to stay bad forever.  Depending on who you ask or who you listen to, we might be over the hump already (though I personally don't think so yet).

The economy will be terrible as long as Obama and his already proven failed strategies are in place.  And I'm pretty certain he has designs on setting himself up as dictator for life.  He obviously can't do so if the economy is good, but if he causes the economy to fail in every aspect and uses George Bush as his scapegoat (which he has been doing) people will be begging for his socialistic/communist teachings because we would then have nothing to lose.  See FDR.
Logged

Hellfighter

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1209
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Livonia, Detroit, MI
  • Last Login: July 30, 2010, 01:48:02 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #13 on: June 20, 2009, 11:32:25 AM »

On the flip side of that, the economy isn't going to stay bad forever.  Depending on who you ask or who you listen to, we might be over the hump already (though I personally don't think so yet).

The economy will be terrible as long as Obama and his already proven failed strategies are in place.  And I'm pretty certain he has designs on setting himself up as dictator for life.  He obviously can't do so if the economy is good, but if he causes the economy to fail in every aspect and uses George Bush as his scapegoat (which he has been doing) people will be begging for his socialistic/communist teachings because we would then have nothing to lose.  See FDR.

Umm, thanks for derailing this topic. Let's not be a troll here and get back on topic of Bridge wars.
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3423
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 10:12:56 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #14 on: June 20, 2009, 12:23:39 PM »

On the flip side of that, the economy isn't going to stay bad forever.  Depending on who you ask or who you listen to, we might be over the hump already (though I personally don't think so yet).

That and right now construction costs seem to be down right now.

Regarding the bridge war, I say go ahead and build both; there will probably be need for a new bridge a few years after whichever bridge is built.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 37
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #15 on: June 20, 2009, 12:37:47 PM »

Well I have to disagree with this statement since many highways ban or restrict truck useage, have separate truck routes and/or lower speed limits for trucks.  Some routes such as I-94 between Chicago and Detroit were obviously designed to carry a lot of truck traffic while on others you'd be hard pressed to ever see a truck.  But the point is, the bad economy is going to reduce (and no doubt has already reduced) truck traffic too, so the timing of this seems a bit odd.

highways with no trucks - the NY Parkway system is an enigma to me.  A lot of other truck-free roads are simply so old that they cannot support modern truck traffic.  CA-110 (Pasadena Fwy) is truck-free simply because it was opened in 1940 and hasn't been able to meet the demands of modern traffic.

separate truck routes - because trucks and cars merge very differently, so having a truck merge and then a car merge (see, for example, 5/405 junction or 5/99 in California) increases safety. 

lower speed limits - trucks can physically not go as fast, safely, as cars.  This is a basic fact of physics and is independent of how well the road is built.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #16 on: June 21, 2009, 12:31:43 AM »

Well I have to disagree with this statement since many highways ban or restrict truck useage, have separate truck routes and/or lower speed limits for trucks.  Some routes such as I-94 between Chicago and Detroit were obviously designed to carry a lot of truck traffic while on others you'd be hard pressed to ever see a truck.  But the point is, the bad economy is going to reduce (and no doubt has already reduced) truck traffic too, so the timing of this seems a bit odd.

highways with no trucks - the NY Parkway system is an enigma to me.  A lot of other truck-free roads are simply so old that they cannot support modern truck traffic.  CA-110 (Pasadena Fwy) is truck-free simply because it was opened in 1940 and hasn't been able to meet the demands of modern traffic.

separate truck routes - because trucks and cars merge very differently, so having a truck merge and then a car merge (see, for example, 5/405 junction or 5/99 in California) increases safety. 

lower speed limits - trucks can physically not go as fast, safely, as cars.  This is a basic fact of physics and is independent of how well the road is built.
And everything you just posted seems to prove my point.    :)
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 37
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #17 on: June 21, 2009, 12:44:47 AM »

I think what you are arguing is not "highways are more difficult for trucks", but rather "reality as a whole is more difficult for trucks".

modern freeways are laid out to give the trucks the best chance they can get, given an operating budget ... and breaking the laws of physics is very, very expensive.  To build a road down a mountain grade that trucks can handle at 40mph may be a significant engineering accomplishment.  To sign it for 65mph for cars is a small favor at the cost of a few rectangular pieces of aluminum and sheeting!
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

Sykotyk

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 871
  • Last Login: April 29, 2018, 02:02:28 AM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #18 on: June 21, 2009, 01:15:54 AM »

But, any 'new' project is built with trucks in mind. The only oddball I can surmise is the Legacy Parkway in Utah, which is truck-restricted. Today, almost any major road project has trucks in mind. And it's usually to get them off the surface streets in towns (i.e., bypasses, limited access routes, expressways).

As for the New York Parkways, most of those roads aren't suitable for trucks (i.e., low clearances). Unless you rebuilt every bridge to be 13'6 or higher, it can't/won't be a truck route. Plus, New York has a very workable setup: Expressways are truck friendly, Parkways are not (and, essentially, every expressway in NY is an interstate, while the parkways are mostly state routes, etc).

Sykotyk
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #19 on: June 21, 2009, 09:05:57 AM »

I think what you are arguing is not "highways are more difficult for trucks", but rather "reality as a whole is more difficult for trucks".

No.  I'm arguing against your original statement which was:
indeed.  all major highway projects are primarily designed with truck traffic in mind.  the fact that the occasional passenger vehicle uses the road too is completely incidental to its purpose.
Obviously that's not the case.  I don't know of any highway that has only an "occasional passenger vehicle" on it.  Car traffic greatly outnumbers truck traffic even on the heaviest "truck routes" and, as already mentioned, many routes don't allow or restrict the use of truck traffic.  If routes were designed specifically or primarily for trucks and car traffic was incidental we wouldn't see 2 sets of speed limits.  There would be one speed limit and that would be the lower truck speed limit, since it wouldn't be the designers  intention for car traffic to get to where they are going so quickly. 

So I would contend that most routes are designed with car and truck traffic in mind while some routes are designed for car traffic only since some routes ban or restrict truck traffic.  Conversely I don't know of any route designated as a truck route where car traffic is not allowed.
Logged

Chris

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2144
  • International road enthusiast

  • Age: 31
  • Location: the Netherlands
  • Last Login: Today at 07:02:18 AM
    • Flickr
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #20 on: June 21, 2009, 09:11:23 AM »

But, any 'new' project is built with trucks in mind. The only oddball I can surmise is the Legacy Parkway in Utah, which is truck-restricted. Today, almost any major road project has trucks in mind.

I have read that trucks are allowed to use the Legacy Parkway in case of road closures on I-15.

Quote
Plus, New York has a very workable setup: Expressways are truck friendly, Parkways are not (and, essentially, every expressway in NY is an interstate, while the parkways are mostly state routes, etc).

The downside is that the few expressways that do allow trucks, are loaded with them...

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9454
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 01:04:57 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #21 on: June 21, 2009, 10:38:55 AM »

I don't know about the NYC parkways, but the ones upstate wouldn't be able to handle trucks even if you did reconstruct the bridges as they are just a layer or two of pavement on dirt with poor/nonexistant base.

However, the Lake Ontario State Parkway does allow commerical vehicles on the section in Orleans county (constructed about 40 years after the rest of the parkway) and was reconstructed east of Latta road so that it can handle trucks were the DOT to actually allow them on it.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Hellfighter

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1209
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Livonia, Detroit, MI
  • Last Login: July 30, 2010, 01:48:02 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2009, 04:26:58 PM »

Looks like MDOT is retaliating by using a ramp as storage for dirt to cut off modifications the bridge company made without MDOT's permission.
Logged

Terry Shea

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 324
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 09:46:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2009, 06:12:32 PM »

I'm really not understanding this at all.  There must have been plans submitted and it must have been known precisely where the bridge was to be built.  It shouldn't be any surprise that a bridge being built to twin/replace another bridge is going to be built next to the existing bridge!  That being stated, it seems that a substantial amount of work has been done on what is now "disputed territory".  Why did the affected parties wait so long to even attempt to do anything and/or make it known that work was being done on land the builder supposedly doesn't own or have rights to?  I smell a rat, and the rat is usually a governmental entity.
Logged

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9454
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 01:04:57 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2009, 01:21:17 PM »

The bridge company unilaterally made changes to the design that made it not comply for federal funding.  Additionally, the government wants the new bridge downriver instead of a second span of the Ambassador bridge.

Personally I think the proposed downriver bridge is better as it would provide a direct connection between I-75 and ON 401.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.