Environmental aspects of proposed bridge draw little attention

Sep 13 2012 4 Comments

By Anjana Schroeder

The Ambassador Bridge already connects Detroit and Windsor. Photo: Juan and Only (flickr)

LANSING – The long battle over building a second bridge between Detroit and Windsor has been almost free of environmental debate.
Instead, opponents and supporters of the proposed project are concentrating on social and economic issues of the project.

The Snyder administration says Michigan and Canada have adequately studied the environmental impacts of building the controversial bridge. Gov. Rick Snyder’s deputy press secretary, Ken Silfven, said there are acceptable standards being met and that “state and federal environment requirements are not optional.”

Tim Fischer of the Michigan Environmental Council said the organization is not focusing on the proposed Detroit River International Crossing because the organization has other priorities. Among several environmental concerns, air quality is the most common factor identified.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expects the rise in vehicles traveling between Detroit and Windsor to have a direct effect on air quality because of emissions of idling diesel trucks and bridge and highway traffic. An EPA report said, “Even with more stringent heavy-duty highway engine standards taking effect over the next decade, during the next 20 years millions of diesel engines already in use will continue to emit large amounts of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, both of which contribute to serious public health problems.”

The second bridge would be a direct competitor to the privately owned Ambassador Bridge.

In a 2007 review of the environmental assessment for building a second bridge, the EPA said, “We continue to have concerns environmentally and procedurally.”

Environmental impact report from Canadian Transit Company. Click on image to enlarge.

The key problems are air quality, storm water and historic resources, it said. It also said, “It is our impression that the environmental assessment does not provide a rigorous analysis of many issues and we do not have a clear understanding of the purpose and need for this project.”

Another environmental impact statement was updated in April 2011 by Avalon Consulting Professionals of Ontario, a consulting firm hired by the Canadian Transit Co.

More than 10 environmental components were identified, including air quality and climate, storm water flow and geology that would be adversely affected by building a second bridge. Nearly all these effects can be mitigated and none would have a significant residual effect, according to the statement.

The Detroit River International Crossing Study final environmental impact statement prepared by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Michigan Department of Transportation was released in 2008.

Air quality, noise impacts, and wildlife and wetlands impacts are among the problems addressed in that report. Each concern was discussed with a solution to minimize harm during construction.
Meanwhile, the project’s future is uncertain.

Despite support from Snyder and the Canadian government, the operators of the Ambassador Bridge are campaigning hard for a state constitutional amendment that would require a public vote before constructing or financing new international bridges or tunnels.

Voters will decide to accept the amendment in November.

© 2013, Capital News Service, Michigan State University School of Journalism. Not to be reproduced without CNS permission.

4 Comments »

  • Harold said:

    Citizens of southwest Detroit have long fought against the City of Detroit’s desire to have a major truck terminal constructed near the railroad yard near Livernois and Clark, not far from the proposed bridge. Construction of a new bridge next to historic Fort Wayne is a part of that scheme. Many throughout the state could care less about Detroit or Detroit residents, about air quality in the area, or even about the national significance of Fort Wayne. Even fewer care about the significant environmental impacts on the Canadian side, where the Objibway Prairie will be impacted. Maroun is small potatoes compared to the big money behind the bridge, so the bridge is pretty much a done deal. By characterizing a new bridge as being anti-Maroun, bridge supporters handily evade addressing the significant environmental, social and economic costs of a new bridge at this location. Hundreds of millions of dollars will be needed just to construct the new infrastructure leading to the bridge–but that’s all seen as a plus by the state since the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (sic) just loves to build and build more roads.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  • White Lake area farmer said:

    Matty Maroun paid West Michigan Republicans Sen Geoff Hansen $5000 and Rep Holly Hughes $500 to promote lies and votes against the bridge project to specifically hurt our local organic farmers and jobs by obstructing environmental consumer products from reaching Canada.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

  • Environmental aspects of proposed bridge draw little attention | Great Lakes Echo | Put Canada First said:

    [...] read more at Environmental aspects of proposed bridge draw little attention | Great Lakes Echo. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Harold said:

    So Governor Snyder and his Republican conspirators just raised Michigan’s gas tax by 49%!!!–from 19 cents a gallon to an initial rate of 28.3 cents per gallon (with automatic increases built into the formula). With a 6% sales tax imposed on top of these exhorbitant gas taxes, Michigan will soon have the HIGHEST GAS TAX in the entire nation. This is truly appalling and eats into the pocketbooks of people who are struggling to make it from paycheck to paycheck. It also assures that wasteful spending and wasteful highways will continue to be built.

    What will not be reported is that Governor Snyder realizes that hundreds of millions of dollars will be needed to build new highways and infrastructure to connect to the proposed new bridge. Additionally, the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (sic) continues to build more and more highways when they can’t even take care of the ones we have already.

    REPEAL THE NEW GAS TAX!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave your response!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

 


You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Show Us You're Human:
If you can't read the reCAPTCHA, click the reload button - - until you get one you can read.

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.