Of course some of you are still non-believers. You do not accept that we will have international trucks on E C Row. I can understand that.
I was at the DRIC Community Consultation Group meeting the other night. I asked Dave Wake of MTO to explain what the big difference of opinion is between their proposal and that of Gridlock Sam. I said in reading what Gord Henderson said the Schwartz proposal was and what DRIC put forward, they seemed very similar to me. ie both talked about 9 or 10 shunnels or short tunnels or overpasses or land bridges or whatever one wants to call them.
He said that in his opinion, they were not that far apart.
I then asked why the newspaper reported that the Mayor was so upset about what DRIC was proposing. His answer back was a surprise. He said that I ought not to believe everything I read in the newspaper.
Are we games playing again? Will Eddie, Dwight and Sandra kiss and make up soon over a "compromise" DRIC road? Will they shove their solution down the throats of the Councillors (how Schwartz can even propose a below-grade road without Reconsideration of Bill Marra's Tunnel Motion I do not know)." Perhaps the depressed road with overpasses will become a short tunnel again. Henderson's column told us what is going to happen as you will read below.
Anyway it would be no big surprise. The DRIC road was, is and will be the main road to the border
There would still be a need however for a redundant road to get trucks to the border even with a DRIC road in an emergency and the need for a temporaty truck road probably when construction started. I thought there was a discussion previously about using E C Row that way.
Eddie knows that and must also know that Dillon Consulting Enginners, the selected engineering firm for the new E C Row rehabilitation study, did a Report in 1993 on E C Row. Here is what they suggested:
Now that looks like an expansion of E C Row to me.
Cansult, the Federal Government who reviewed Schwartz stated:
"A review of the General Arrangements of the E.C. Row Expressway bridge sites from Matchette Road at the west end of the expressway easterly to Lauzon Parkway reveals that, as part of the planning and design for the E.C. Row Expressway, allowances had been made for a third lane in each direction within the existing median width in twelve (12) of the sixteen (16) sites. Furthermore, provisions had been made at four (4) structure locations for an ultimate collectordistributor system, namely from just east of Dominion Boulevard easterly to east of Howard Avenue. In that area, the two (2) lanes in each direction, which would function as the collector lanes in the future, have been constructed, while the future core lanes, two (2) in each direction, will be placed within the existing “median” space."
So expansion is easily undertaken it seems.
But now we need an excuse don't we to expand the expressway. After all, the Mayor is our no-international-trucks-on-E C Row champion. He needs a graceful way to do a complete reversal as is being done with the DRIC road.
Money is the root of all excuses in Windsor so follow along. Back in 2006, this was written about the rehabilitation cost of E C Row:
"E.C. Row Expressway/Dougall Parkway - ongoing annual rehabilitation of the pavement and bridge structures along the E.C. Row Expressway and Dougall Parkway. The expressway is comprised of 106 lane km, 26 bridges, 2 culverts with a span greater than 3m, and 2 pedestrian bridges. Perpetual cost to preserve this infrastructure is $2.5 million per year. NOTE: Does not include capacity improvements to the expressway."
In 2007, the wording was similar except for a key figure:
E.C. Row Expressway/Dougall Parkway - ongoing annual rehabilitation of the pavement and bridge structures along the E.C. Row Expressway and Dougall Parkway. The expressway is comprised of 107 lane km, 26 bridges, 2 culverts with a span greater than 3m, and 2 pedestrian bridges. Perpetual cost to upgrade and maintain this infrastructure is $5 million per year. Note: Does not include capacity improvements to the expressway.
The cost has now doubled! Sure costs increase but in 2005 it was only $2.35 million per year.
Looking at the Dillon rehab work fees, the cost for the rehab itself I am told might be calculated in this fashion. The design engineering fees are a percentage of the anticipated construction costs unless there is something unusual or particularly challenging in the design. The fee for a bridge rehab would be about 3.5% of the construction cost. The total fee to Dillon is $432,00 which makes the construction cost around $12.4M
Now that is a big chunk of money just for rehabilitation work when we have to pay for Detroit sports extravaganzas, watermains, sewers, an East end arena and a soon to-be-announced new City Hall. Where will the City find that money and will taxpayers go crazy over it? What can we do, what can we do?
I would wager that the Senior Levels would jump to our rescue. Sandra, Dwight, (after ther re-election of course) whoever from the Feds would rush right in to save us from this financial catastrophe. We could not blame Eddie or Council. I am sure that it was the past Administration that messed up in not keeping up the roads. This Administration was being forced to spend so much more money. After all there have been bridge collapses elsewhere and we cannot have it here. Wait a minute---that sounds like the WUC again doesn't it.
The Province will upload E C Row so it is a provincial road like the new DRIC road will be. The DRIC road will be called the continuation of Highway 401 so the other could be called the Highway 401 Business Section road.
Anyway, there is no point complaining. We are getting the DRIC road and an upgraded E C Row whether we like to or not. In the end, it is probably the right thing to do but oh the drama and the waste of time and effort to get there.
PS...And if I have not convinced you yet, then here is what Henderson had to say that should demonstrate it convincingly. Please do not try and tell me that this is not a giant game with Windorites the butt of the joke.
Waving the white flag
Gord Henderson, Thursday, August 23, 2007
...Perhaps it's time for the chamber leadership to swallow its pride and go, cap in hand, to CAW Local 444 president Ken Lewenza for a quick primer on how high-stakes negotiations are conducted.
Rule number one: Don't try to cut the knees out from under your bargaining team, especially not at a critical stage when the folks across the table are signalling they have more to offer.
Economic Development Minister Sandra Pupatello couldn't have made it any clearer last week if she had scrawled it in cherry red neon: DRIC's proposal is merely a starting point. "I anticipate when we get to the end we will be very close to what the city is looking for," Pupatello told The Star's Dave Battagello. "Is it perfect today? I don't think so. There is still room for improvement."
That was an invitation from someone with the premier's ear to sit down and hammer out a compromise that might not be everything the city wants, but will be dramatically better than the DRIC pitch.
But apparently Pupatello's message sailed right over the chamber's head. Instead of backstopping the city in extracting the best possible terms from the Dalton Gang, the chamber wants an immediate capitulation that would compromise Windsor's future while leaving hundreds of millions of federal and provincial dollars for capital improvements on the table...
An incensed Lewenza couldn't believe his ears when the chamber tumbled -- like a cheap trick -- for the DRIC's no-tunnel opening gambit. "There's no doubt the chamber has weakened the city's bargaining position," confided Lewenza. "It has undermined the city and the process and our negotiating ability to improve the program..."
Even Energy Minister Dwight Duncan, who was playing "bad cop" to Pupatello's "good cop" last week, is now signalling there's more to be had from bargaining. "There's room to compromise. Our fervent desire is to work with Windsor to enhance this proposal," Duncan told me, adding he's looking forward to seeing proposals being prepared by the city's tunnel engineering experts...
According to a government insider, total tunnelling is a non-starter, because it can't be justified on a cost-benefit basis and because of the horrendously costly precedent it would set for Toronto and other cities pushing for infrastructure improvements.
But it's possible, said the insider, that the $1.5-billion DRIC plan, which involves covering over about 1.5 km, or one quarter, of the route north to the E.C. Row, could be improved with longer or additional covered sections. "Can we get to two kilometres or 2.5 kilometres? If it's feasible, you've got a government that's prepared to do that."
He said the city has pushed the process a long way from the ill-conceived Nine-Point Plan of 2003, which would have wrecked the E.C. Row, and now a significantly better deal than the DRIC plan is reachable. "We're this close," he said, holding two fingers apart. "We just need to get over that last hump."
At some point a deal will be done, no thanks to those who would sell Windsor short. A better quality of life and hundreds of millions of dollars short."
Please note in addition the vicious attack on the business community. This attack is nothing more than telling the business community to shut up about Eddie or else since Gord knows how vulnerable Eddie is now.
Gee I wonder who the government insider is who revealed all of this information to Gord around the time Gord was speaking to Dwight. ["We're this close," he said, holding two fingers apart." Which politician made this gesture recently at a meeting I was told]
Interesting use of the words "starting point" don't you think. Who else used that term?
I wonder if Eddie ever had this information about the tunnel being a non-starter and if he did, why were we induced into believing that a tunnel was an option and for so long! And as for this idea that just popped into the insider's mind about a longer tunnel, that has already been disclosed to Councillors when Schwartz was in town recently. I was told this by a City hall insider some time ago! It is not something "new" but is something that is already on the table.
All Gord is doing is setting us up for the "compromise" and trying to give Council a way out of its solemn pledge as evidenced by Marra's Tunnel Motion. He is revelaing nothing more than what is around now except that taxpayers have not yet been let in on the secret. Our role is just to pay and pay and pay.
So Eddie will be our big hero again for his wonderful negotiating skills provided he is still Mayor after the WUC fiasco.
Isn't this what Henderson's column is really about. Forget Eddie's miscue on WUC....he has bigger and better things on his mind to save Windsor. We need him around to get us all of those hundreds of millions of dollars (Like the $300M BIF funds that are about to expire perhaps because the Mayor could never achieve a deal?)
Dave Wake already said at the CCG that the deal is effectively done. Now Henderson is telling us what Schwartz has already proposed as disclosed to Councillors as if this is something new. We see the first step being taken re E C Row.
Want more:
Why the hell do you think senior Provincial insisted that DRIC call what they proposed "short tunnels."
And why the hell do you think that the Provincial Ministry inquiry of WUC will be a white-wash if public involvement in setting the Terms of Reference is not allowed! After all, we don't want to shoot the WUC messenger do we? We have DRIC road deals to do.
Please distribute widely. We ARE the community Voice!
