Home --> Welcome |
|
Your Frequently Asked Questions
We have compiled a list of Frequently Asked Questions, based on feedback we have received from the website. We will update this list, as more questions are received. Click on the answer link following each question below to view our response. Should you have any further questions, please contact us. We will use this page to respond to your questions.
1. How is the viewshed along Squaw Island affected by the new bridge? Are there any proposed changes to the Island? (Buffalo, NY)
Although Squaw Island is not considered to be an aesthetic resource of statewide significance, and it is not officially designated as a local resource of aesthetic significance, we understand that some local residents consider Squaw Island to be an aesthetic resource and plan to treat it as such. For this reason, the aesthetic significance of Squaw Island warrants a more detailed analysis.
A Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) conducted for environmental review purposes looked at potential impacts of the bridge from vantage points north and south of the Preferred Alternative location. The VIA examined the existing visual quality of the viewshed from each location, the visibility of the project from each location, and the impact of this visibility on the location.
The existing view toward the proposed bridge crossing site from the northern tip of Squaw Island includes a contrast of natural and manmade visual elements already established by the existence of the International Railroad Bridge and the corresponding swing bridge traversing the Black Rock Canal. The north end of Squaw Island (north of the Canadian National Railway right-of-way) has been remediated and is now an urban park. The existing visual quality to the south from this vantage point is considered “high” due to the aesthetic appeal of the river and limited visibility of the sewage treatment plant that is located to the south of the existing railroad alignment on the island.
The impact of the proposed bridge is considered “high” from this vantage point because the bridge would be visually dominant. However, the impact from the project on the viewshed is also categorized as “neutral” because some may consider it a contrast to the natural environment of the Niagara River. The bridge may be seen as an attractive feature that is consistent with the context of the international commercial trade corridor established in the late nineteenth century. There is also the visually similar feature of the Peace Bridge in the distance as well as the nearby International Railroad Bridge.
The south end of Squaw Island is more actively used than the north end of the Island, in part because it has been used for recreational purposes for a longer period of time and is better known to the general public. The park includes parking areas, a portion of the Erie County Riverwalk, limited open space with shelters and access to the Bird Island Pier Trail that extends along the Black Rock Canal to Lake Erie, the Bird Island Sewage Treatment Plant, and a small interpretive site dedicated to the Underground Railroad.
The quality of views to the west of the south end of Squaw Island are considered “high,” but views to the north are considered “neutral” at best due to the positive impact of the Niagara River mixed with the negative impact of the Bird Island Sewage Treatment Plant. The visibility of the proposed bridge will be “moderate.”
The level of impact of the proposed bridge from this vantage point is “moderate” since the distance is considerably farther from the proposed bridge than the vantage point at the north end of Squaw Island. The nature of the impact is considered to be “neutral” because the proposed structure is consistent with the surrounding manmade environment including the existing International Railroad Bridge, Ferry Street Bascule Bridge, and Peace Bridge to the south.
Design measures and other forms of mitigation will be incorporated into the project on a voluntary basis to reduce visual impact where possible. These measures remove or improve existing negative aesthetic conditions and establish a fund for use by local planning groups to focus resources on aesthetic mitigation of resources that may be determined to be locally important, but are neither of statewide significance or officially designated as locally significant.
Mitigation measures for this project may include:
Intermodal opportunities that will tie together truck, rail opportunities and possibly water borne shipping of cargo are a definite possibility within the International Railroad Bridge corridor due to the close proximity and potential for partnership with area railroads and the Black Rock Canal. The intermodal concept also has significant environmental benefits in terms of lowering fuel consumption and vehicle emission rates. Truck/rail intermodal operations elsewhere in the United States and Canada have already demonstrated that they can efficiently handle short and long haul cargoes, reduce truck idling and transit time, decrease air emissions and reduce fuel consumption and minimize traffic congestion.
To fully develop this intermodal center, the ANSBG will need support from Canadian National Railroad and CSX, both railroads that own and operate land near the landing of the Ambassador Niagara Signature Bridge in the US
Yes, we are aware of the effort to downgrade State Route 198 (Scajaquada Expressway). The proposed design of the project will direct traffic exiting the plaza in the United States to the westbound lanes of the Scajaquada Expressway, ensuring that no traffic will enter the eastbound Scajaquada Expressway.
Our efforts to direct traffic away from the eastbound Scajaquada Expressway will be clearly stated within environmental documentation prepared for the project, particularly where the project’s coordination with local planning efforts is indicated.
We are very familiar with the Good Neighbors Planning Alliance. On June 11, 2005 representatives from the ANSBG went on a walk through of the Black Rock Neighborhood that was sponsored by the Black Rock/Riverside GPNA to review conditions and pinpoint potential improvements.
Additionally, on November 20, 2004 we coordinated a walking tour of the ANSBG project area that was hosted by the Black Rock/Riverside GPNA.
On October 21, 2004 we presented the Ambassador Niagara Signature Bridge Project to the Black Rock community at a public meeting sponsored by the Black Rock/Riverside GPNA. One hundred sixty people attended this meeting where the project was presented, followed by a video fly-through of the project. The floor was then opened for a lengthy question and answer session.
Click here to see a list of all of our meetings with the general public and civic officials.
We have reviewed and are familiar with the goals and objectives of relevant planning documents such as the City of Buffalo Comprehensive Plan and the Black Rock-Riverside planning document, “Building a Neighborhood of Choice: A Neighborhood Plan for the Riverside Planning Community.” It is our goal to ensure that whenever possible, our project is consistent with and supports achieving those goals.
5. Did the Detroit Bridge replace any "Authority" such as the "Peace Bridge Authority" in place in Buffalo? I am for privatization when appropriate. I would like to take a more informed position on this very interesting concept. (Hamburg, NY)
The Ambassador Bridge between Detroit, Michigan and Windsor, Ontario has a long history of private ownership and operation. The Detroit International Bridge Company (DIBC) and the Canadian Transport Company (CTC), both owned by CenTra Inc. of Michigan, operate the Ambassador Bridge between Detroit and Windsor. Rights to the operation of the Ambassador Bridge were statutorily granted to the American Transit Company by a 1921 federal statute to construct, maintain and operate a bridge between Detroit and Windsor, now the Ambassador Bridge. In 1924, the stock of the American and Canadian Transit Companies was purchased by the DIBC and the CTC. Ownership of DIBC and CTC changed in 1979 when the family of businessman Joseph A. Bower withdrew from management of the bridge. At this point, the Central Cartage Company of Detroit (CenTra, Inc.) purchased the rights to the bridge.
DIBC owns and controls the portion of the Ambassador Bridge and facilities in the US, while CTC owns and controls the portion of the Ambassador Bridge and facilities in Canada. DIBC maintains a series of arrangements with the Department of Homeland Security (and CTC with comparable Canadian Government entities, including Customs Canada and Transport Canada) with respect to the operation of customs and immigration inspection facilities at the Ambassador Bridge, as well as with respect to various transportation infrastructure security matters.
