The Ambassador Bridge company is proposing to transfer derelict properties in Windsor’s west end to the city, aiming to avoid costly expropriations.
Why it matters: The offer could save Windsor taxpayers from millions in legal fees and compensation costs associated with expropriating 45 properties, many of which are owned by the bridge company.
The Canadian Transit Company (CTC) claims it has been prepared to demolish vacant structures for years but requires city permission to proceed.
Windsor’s city council recently voted to begin expropriation proceedings for properties primarily located along Indian Road, Edison Street, and Bloomfield Road.
CTC argues that transferring these properties to the city could resolve a long-standing dispute over boarded-up homes in the Sandwich neighbourhood.
Driving the news: The city of Windsor announced its plan to expropriate 45 vacant and boarded homes, many owned by companies linked to the Ambassador Bridge. This decision has reignited tensions between the city and CTC, which owns the bridge.
CTC stated it is ready to demolish all remaining vacant structures at its own expense if the city permits the demolitions.
The company has previously expressed frustration over the city's refusal to issue demolition permits, claiming it has complied with emergency demolition orders on select properties.
Mayor Drew Dilkens emphasized the need to restore the Sandwich neighbourhood, which has suffered from decay due to the presence of these properties.
State of play: Negotiations between CTC and the city have stalled, with the company accusing Windsor officials of preferring litigation over resolution.
CTC's proposal includes exchanging portions of surplus roads for the properties, which the company claims would benefit both parties.
The city has already incurred approximately $3 million in legal and professional fees since 2017 related to negotiations over these properties.
According to CTC, the city’s decision to pursue expropriation could lead to unnecessary delays and costs for taxpayers.
The big picture: The Ambassador Bridge has been at the center of disputes with the city for decades, particularly concerning land ownership and development plans.
CTC has owned many of the properties in question since the 1980s, originally acquiring them for a planned second bridge span that never materialized.
In addition to the proposed property transfer, CTC is moving forward with constructing a new secondary inspection plaza near the existing bridge.
This project has federal approval, but it requires the relocation of a Windsor fire hall and underground utilities.
What they're saying: CTC has publicly criticized the city's handling of the situation, arguing that it has consistently sought to demolish the vacant houses.
“There is an easy solution where we demolish all of the structures — the city just has to permit this,” the company stated in a recent communication.
Mayor Dilkens countered that if CTC was genuinely willing to settle, they wouldn’t resist the expropriation process.
Dilkens also noted that the city plans to sell the acquired properties for private residential construction, intending to recoup costs.
By the numbers: The city’s expropriation plan involves 45 properties, most of which are currently vacant and boarded up.
Since 2017, Windsor has spent about $3 million in legal fees related to negotiations with CTC.
CTC has expressed willingness to demolish derelict homes at its own cost, potentially saving taxpayers considerable expenses.
The majority of the homes targeted for expropriation are located along several streets, including Indian Road, Edison Street, and Bloomfield Road.
What's next: The city plans to proceed with the expropriation process, which may lead to court battles if CTC contests the actions.
As negotiations remain stalled, the city will continue appraising the properties to determine their value for compensation.
Mayor Dilkens has indicated a desire to resolve the issues without incurring additional costs, emphasizing the importance of rebuilding the Sandwich neighbourhood.
The outcome of this dispute could set a precedent for how similar situations are handled in the future, impacting local governance and community development.