Evaluation of Alternatives and Options For the City of Windsor Sam Schwartz Engineering PLLC January 2005

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 Background Evaluation of River Crossing Alternatives Recommended Crossing Alternative Connecting Roadways 5) Conclusion

City : Overall Objectives The current border crossings proposals were evaluated with regard for the following over-all objectives 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. 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: Be least intrusive environmentally and socially Consider the impact on existing neighborhoods, preserve the sense of community, and take into consideration proximity to residential, commercial and institutional uses Provide for choice and a flexible integrated transportation network Provide for redundancy GET TRUCKS OFF CITY STREETS Provide controlled access to link to Highway 401 Image courtesy of Canadian Transit Company

Message I Received Seek a Utilitarian Solution Greatest good for greatest number Least harm to the fewest people Individual interests respected but not reflected

Work Process Reviewed background documents and data Field observations Met and/or phone conversations with proponents of river crossings and other strategies including ferry, rail and remote staging areas Met with council and city engineers of Windsor Met with Windsor, LaSalle, county, provincial and federal representatives Met with various stakeholder groups and associations 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 Heavy truck traffic and long queues on local streets: Huron Church Road Wyandotte Street College Avenue Pedestrian and vehicular safety compromised by heavy truck traffic Significant Air Emissions and Noise Impacts 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 Queues counted from College Ave. 22-week survey from July 8- December 20, 2002 and reflects 6 available customs stations during survey Maximum queue length of 5800 meters (Cabana Rd.) Source: MTO 2003

Background 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 3 rd 2004 May 7 th 2004

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

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

Background USA Bound Weekday Truck Volumes* vs. Processing Capacity (13 Stations) * May 3 rd 2004 May 7 th 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 * 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 * 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 * 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 * 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 2030 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 2030 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 2030 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 2030 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 2030 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 Trucks remaining on Ambassador Bridge 2030 Source: 2004 Study by the Bi-National Report

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

Source: Bi-National Study 2030 Traffic Level of Service Existing and Proposed Crossings

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: Would draw fewest trucks Wider river crossings Pass through sensitive areas Poor interstate access Significant community issues Fail capacity test Leaving three alternatives for further study: DRTP Central Crossing/ Mich-Can Ambassador Twinning

Alternatives - DRTP Single Barreled Rail Tube 2 one lane truck tunnels 200m Residential Impact Zone Customs Plaza 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 Rail Tunnel Single lane tubes- 4.07m (13-4 ) wide and 4.38m (14-4 ) high. 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 Cattle Chute Design 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 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: No median shoulders on truckway 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 Noise and air emissions for adjacent residential neighborhoods 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: 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 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 Image plaza 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. Central Crossing located at end of Prospect Avenue Passenger and Commercial vehicles Located 3 km (approximately 1.8 mi) southwest of Ambassador Bridge Proposed 2 lanes in each direction 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 Access via 401 and EC Row Traffic Impacts on Local Streets Long term use Ambassador Twinning (+) Full control from 401 and EC Row both directions (0) Reduction only in local portions of Huron-Church Rd. and Talbot Rd. (+) 2 added lanes in both directions Sufficient for long term DRTP (-) Fails South bound w/ 3 traffic signals to Highway 401; Fails Northbound in Phase 1 (-) Bottlenecks on Dougall Ave. may cause truck diversion to Ambassador Bridge (-) 1 added lane in each direction for trucks- Insufficient for long term Mich Can/E.C. Row Expressway Extension (0) Full control only from E.C. Row (-) Dependent on a widened E.C Row; Major traffic disruption in Windsor (+) 2 added lanes in both directions Sufficient for long term

Crossing Alternatives Conclusion Air and Noise Impacts in 200m Approach Road Width Toll Booth and Customs Impacts Added Redundancy Ambassador Twinning (-) 1372 residences and 33 commercial businesses (-) Six to Eight lanes (+) Proposed Customs Facility in industrial areas at E.C. Row (-) No DRTP (-) 1262 * residences and 82 commercial businesses (+) Two lanes (-) Proposed Customs facility b/t Tecumseh Rd. and Dougall Ave. (0) For trucks only Mich-Can/ E.C. Row Extension (-) 1039 residences, 116 businesses (0) Four lanes (0) Not Defined (+) Yes

Crossing Alternatives Conclusion Construction Time Frame Consistency with Community Goals Land Acquisition Ambassador Twinning (0) 4 to 5 years (-) Heavy impact to Sandwich communitynot consistent (-) 8 acquisitions and ROW expenditures needed DRTP (0) 3-4 years (-) Proposed route bisects city of Windsornot consistent (+) Little if any private lands needed for completion Mich-Can/ E.C. Row Extension (0) 3-4 years (-) E.C. Row-Lauzon Ext. would add trucks to the E.C. Row thoroughfare-not consistent (-) 35 acquisitions and ROW expenditures needed

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

Crossing Alternatives Conclusion Alternatives must incorporate the following: Consider the long-term objectives and not be reactive Be least intrusive environmentally and socially Consider the impact on existing neighborhoods, preserve the sense of community, and take into consideration proximity to residential, commercial and institutional uses Provide for choice and a flexible integrated transportation network Provide for redundancy Get trucks off city streets 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 No added redundancy for cars Poor traffic performance Limited capacity 1262* residences impacted Safety compromised Not fully controlled Significant air and noise impacts adjacent to route Another new crossing would be required Red = inherent to the crossing itself Ambassador Bridge-Twinning Lack of redundancy 8 lane highway through Sandwich Towne 6 lane highway along Talbot Road and Huron Church Road 1383 residences impacted Significant air and noise impacts in Sandwich Mich-Can / E.C. Row Extension Dependent on widened E.C. Row to 8-10 lanes & new Lauzon Parkway Extension Major disruption to Windsor traffic Safety compromised 35 ROW takings 1039 residences impacted Significant air and noise impacts adjacent to E.C. Row

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

Crossing Alternatives Access Options Goals for Roadways linking Highway 401 and Crossing: Fully controlled access from Highway 401 Minimize number of residences affected Utilize industrial areas to the extent possible Two lanes in each direction 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: Collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to roadway design Reserves residential, aesthetic, historic and environmental resources Grand Central Parkway - New York, NY: 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: 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 A new river crossing is needed by 2010-2015 A decision must be made ASAP to meet the target date Overall solution must be multi-modal and balanced and must satisfy demand beyond 2030 This is a multi-billion dollar problem annually; we should not be afraid to THINK BIG Context sensitive design must be used Fast track construction techniques should be considered 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