LANSING – If the controversial New International Trade Crossing bridge is built between Detroit and Windsor, it would have the biggest effect on relieving traffic congestion between the two nations, a study said, whereas a second Ambassador Bridge located next to the current span would not. The study did not, however, recommend one project or the other.

The study, by East Lansing-based Anderson Economic Group, also said the public would not have to pick up the costs for repaying the bonds for either the NITC or the second Ambassador Project. But the study also said some state laws would have to be changed to ensure that taxpayers are protected.

But on balance, it indicated more advantages if the NITC is built than if the new Ambassador Bridge is built. Though the study was not a slam dunk in favor of the NITC – known before this year, and still largely known in Windsor, as the Detroit River International Crossing – supporters used social media sites to distribute stories detailing the findings of the study.

The study was conducted on its own to have results that supporters or opponents of the different projects could not charge was biased by whomever paid for the study. In conducting the study, the reviewers relied on public documents and news stories, as well as information supporters of both projects made available.

The international crossings in Detroit – the seventh-busiest international trade crossing on the planet – need to be expanded and updated, the study said. At 80-years old, the current Ambassador Bridge is forced to have numerous lane closures for maintenance. And the tunnel between Detroit and Windsor cannot accommodate many trucks.

Of the two projects, building the NITC would be the larger, costing an estimated $2.2 billion, while a new Ambassador Bridge would cost up to $500 million. The $2.2 billion figure includes the plazas and freeway tie-ins, not just the bridge. The Anderson Group estimated the NITC project could actually cost up to $4.7 billion.

However, because of its location and the fact that new ramps and access roads would be built to the NITC, especially the construction of a new customs facility to process trucks moving across the borders, the NITC would go a long way to relieving cross-border congestion. A new Ambassador Bridge would not reduce congestion as much, even with additional customs agents, the study said.

Another potentially major benefit to Michigan taxpayers if the NITC was built is the prospect of as much as $2 billion in federal highway and transportation monies coming to the state both to help build the bridge and because the Canadian funds could be used as a match for federal money.

As structured and proposed, both projects should protect taxpayers from having to shoulder the bond costs for either bridge, the study said. But to be sure, state law should be changed to ensure taxpayers are not stuck with costs.

And the study said if traffic volumes do not meet estimates, that could force much higher toll fares to help pay off the cost of the NITC.

A spokesperson for Sen. Mike Kowall (R-White Lake Township), chair of the Senate Economic Development Committee, which is reviewing legislation (SB 410 and SB 411 ) to allow for a bridge authority, said the senator was still processing the study and had no immediate comment.

Governor Rick Snyder has strongly supported construction of the new bridge, which would be two miles south of the current Ambassador Bridge. His administration has proposed creating an authority that would encompass Michigan and Canadian officials to oversee operations at the bridge and to choose a contractor and raise financing for its construction.

Lt. Governor Brian Calley has been given the job of convincing the Legislature to support that plan, or something similar. But the administration has also indicated it has ideas on how to move the bridge issue if the Legislature will not move on the legislation that is supported by the federal governments in both nations as well as most local officials and the vast majority of business interests.

But the owners of the Ambassador Bridge, the Detroit International Bridge Company, oppose the NITC in favor of a new Ambassador Bridge built next to the current structure. That bridge would be built at their cost, but Canadian officials, largely worried about landing a second structure just outside the Windsor downtown (and national security officials in both countries worried about having two bridges next to one another in a post-September 11 world), have thus far refused to give approval for the structure. The U.S. Coast Guard has also not signed off on a second Ambassador.

Owners of the Ambassador Bridge have spent millions on commercials opposing the NITC.

And for years, most legislative Republicans have also refused to support the NITC/DRIC, arguing that it was either not needed or that if a new bridge was to be built, it should not be at taxpayer expense.

However, the Canadian government has committed to finance up to $550 million of what Michigan would spend in terms of building highway access and ramps to the bridge. Repaying the Canadian government would be done through toll fares.

This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com

a>>