Clear Full Forecast

Residents Wait for Word On Future of River Property

By 250 News

Tuesday, May 26, 2009 03:59 AM

Prince George, B.C. – The final report on flooding and mitigation efforts fails to give concerned Prince George homeowners answers on their future.
Residents Bob and Anne Martin listened closely as they heard how “a change of land use” may be the future for the property they call home. That change of land use could mean expropriation, or raising their PG Pulpmill Road home above the flood plain level. The report indicates the ideal option would be to turn the highest risk areas into green space. “Really it is the only option that makes sense, “ says Anne Martin. She and husband Bob, both former City Councilors, have lived in their P.G. Pulpmill Road home for some 26 years. Anne doesn’t expect a decision soon, but would not be surprised if  her home eventually is turned into parkland, “We’ve really enjoyed the property, but really, something has to be done.”
For the Martin’s the only hint about the future of their home came from Grant Bain, the Manager of Planning when he said properties along the south side of PG Pulpmill Road   may have fewer options available as there is little that can be done to protect those particular properties.
But while the final report has been delivered, there won’t be any decisions on what action will be taken until after the public consultation and there are concerns about the costs connected to mitigating flood damage.
The report presented to Prince George City Council last night delivered a number of projects which could be carried out.   The total price tag for the full wish list is over $35 million dollars, however, the top five items alone still come in at $32.6 million. (see previous story)
Councilor Brian Skakun says he doesn’t see how the City can cover the costs of these actions without the assistance of the Provincial and Federal Governments.  
Councilor Cameron Stolz says he looks towards having the Federal Government cover much of the costs as they did for the township of Shelley (covering 90% of bank reinforcement).
Councilor Dave Wilbur says he finds it problematic that the province will come to the table when there is a disaster, but isn’t here to talk about sharing the costs of being proactive to prevent damage.
There is also a question about maintenance costs associated with a set back dike, somewhere in the range of $600 thousand a year.   There has been some work approved in the form of the sub drain work on River Road ($2 million dollars from the Province) which is designed to be compatible with a future dike along that line. The City has also applied for funding for two projects , one being the flood relief channel on Cottonwood Island, the other being  design money for the River Road dike.
City Manager Derek Bates says clearly there will have to be some discussion with provincial emergency officials and the federal government on the matter of funding.

Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Buy the properties that are flooded fairly often. It will be cheaper than covering the costs of building dikes ect.
Martin is probably interested in expropriation now because who would buy into that area with the threats of flood and expropriation. The only money she might get.
"Councilor Dave Wilbur says he finds it problematic that the province will come to the table when there is a disaster, but isn’t here to talk about sharing the costs of being proactive to prevent damage."

Isn't he putting the cart before the horse? I would think that the discussion about which level of governemnt might be contributing to this is yet to happen. I would also expect that at least the Province will be providing some money.

I very much agree with downnotout. The reason we are in this pickle is because we keep fighting Mother Nature. She has a lot of clout. She must be wondering why people continue to not understand her needs.
Downnotout says it. I agree.
Seamutt is probably right, and I agree with the others, Mother nature will win any contest we propose, she can wait us all out. Confucious say: he who build on low land will have wet feet. or something like that.
metalman.
Agreed. Expropriate the impacted lands, pay fair market value for them (or even more than fair market value if it makes sense) and don't allow any further devlopment on them unless it's parkland or something similar.

It is a blow for the people who are impacted, but this truly is a case where I think we have to do what is right for the majority of people in town and not spend huge amounts of dough to "protect" a very small amount of property within the overall area of the city. Maybe this is one step towards reclaiming part of that area and letting mother nature do what she does best without needing to worry about it as much in the future, thus costing us more money every year.
Wow, a riverfront park! Finally, we will realize the natural amenities we truly have. Sort of like Stanley Park. Buy everyone out, relocate industry to more appropriate location. May be better financially in the long run and create a valuable amenity as well.
Remember the Isle Cache was taken out for the same reason, the precedent has been set. How did those people make out in the end anyhow? Anyone know?