Clear Full Forecast

Flood Control Solutions Report Up for Discussion Tonight

By 250 News

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 03:58 AM

Prince George, B.C.-   Members of the public are invited to a special information session this evening to discuss the “Flood Risk Evaluation and Flood Control Solutions, Phase Two” report.
 
The report, prepared by Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, recommends general and specific projects for the protection of flood risk areas within the city.
 
The consultant will present the report at 7 tonight in rooms 205/206 at the PG Civic Centre.  
The Phase two report includes input from the community engagement sessions held last June.
 
Tonight’s meeting will be facilitated by the Fraser Basin Council and will include discussion on project priorities.  The rpeort presented two   lists of  projects. The first were general in nature and include:
  • Select freeboard (minimal cost)  This would be the level above the flood plain as the new mark  for construction
  •  
  • Revise floodplain maps and City’s floodplain regulation bylaw ($20,000)
  •  
  • Install pump-test well/level gauges for Area AN to assess groundwater ($42,500)
  •  
  • Prepare erosion hazard maps ($25,000)
  •  
  • Install water-level gauges & develop winter flow monitoring program ($70,000)
  •  
  • Develop ice-related flood forecast procedures and public notification policy ($20,000)
  •  
  • Develop freshet forecasting procedures ($25,000)
  •  
  • Monitor river bed at confluence ($15,000)
  •  
  • Monitor future impacts on flood flows (minimal cost)
    1. Area A

    Enlarging the Cottonwood Island side-channel was identified as a beneficial project although it would not reduce Flood Construction Levels in the area. The project would be carried out  in 2 parts, with the first  part (mainly engineering) at an estimated cost of $390,000 and thesecond part (mainly construction) of $3.5 M.

    N – Nechako South Bank at Confluence:  Setback dike ($300,000 engineering; $15.5 M Class D)
  • Area C
  • F – Fraser West Bank at Hudson’s Bay Slough West of Queensway: Check adequacy of existing protection ($10,000 engineering)
  • Area C
  • N – Nechako North Bank near Confluence: Land-use change and local floodproofing ($50,000 engineering; $9.3 M Class D)
  • Area D
  • N – Nechako North Bank West of John Hart Bridge: Raise Preston Road (if supported by further investigations) and/or local  floodproofing/land-use change ($100,000 engineering; $4 M Class D – assuming road is raised)
  • Area B
  • F – Fraser West Bank at South Fort George: Local floodproofing/land-use change ($20,000 engineering; $2.9 M Class D)
  • Area B
  • N – Nechako North Bank East of John Hart Bridge Building/infrastructure inventory and wet floodproofing ($25,000 engineering)
  • Area E
  • N – Nechako North Bank at Morning Place: Local floodproofing/land-use change ($15,000 engineering; $1.4 M Class D)
  • Area D
  • F – Fraser West Bank at Lansdowne South End: Local floodproofing/land-use change ($5,000 engineering; $0.8 M Class D)
  • Area G
  • N – Nechako South Bank between John Hart and Foothills Bridges Infrastructure inventory ($5,000 engineering)
  • Area F
  • N – Nechako South Bank at Foot Hills Bridge Infrastructure inventory ($5,000 engineering)
  • Area F
  • F – Fraser West Bank at Northwood Pulpmill Road  Inventory and raising of Landooz Road ($5,000 engineering & predesign; $5.8 M Class D)
  • Area G
  • F – Fraser West Bank across from Shelley Water Survey Canada gauge check ($0)
  • Area A
  • F – Fraser West Bank at Yellowhead Highway Infrastructure inventory ($5,000-engineering)
  • Area E
  • F – Fraser West Bank at Island upstream of Confluence  Confirm extent of revised floodplain relative to housing ($0) Total engineering costs are $545,000. Preliminary Class D costs amount to a total of $39.7 M.

The total estimated cost of the above projects is $217,500.

Thereport also presented several  areaspecific projects which  are  much more expensive.  In order of priority they  are:


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Um......

Live above 100 year flood plain?
How nice to see that the powers still can't find their @$$ with both hands.
Of course they have to hire all sorts of experts, then when it all goes wrong, they have someone besides themselves to blame.
I sometimes wonder how in the world we ever got along without experts, insurance companies, and litigous lawyers.
metalman.
Perhaps they should have a chat with the city of Duncan?
I am sure they will have a lot to say about experts,governments,and insurance companies!
Right on metalman..
The way I see it is...
EXPERTS...$40,000,000.00

LOCAL CONTRACTOR... (Dredging) Less than $2,000,000.00 Minus the free gravel. Balance of $38,000,000.00 to go to fixing infrastructure. No more potholes... That would be nice!!

What we need is a city staff, competent enough to make these kind of desisions, without the use of consultants.
Wishfull thinking...

Yeah, but Giter, that kind of common sense has evaporated in the world of politics, it just can't happen. To paraphrase a previous post made by myself; you don't fix the blockage in your bathtub drain by building up the sides of the bathtub, and by installing water level monitoring stations outside the tub, you unclog the drain. If the drain is too small, you put in a larger one.
Dredge the confluence, the trench will be a quarter mile long, and it will have to be deep enough to not silt up too quickly, and I promise to you that the fish will get over it real soon.
metalman.
don't know about the rest of you but the above numbers make no sense. They say total cost is $217,500. According to my addition that doesn't even cover the engineering costs which in my opinion at $1,480,000 are way to high. What is wrong with the city engineers or do we have any. If they are not capable of planning a project like this get rid of them. It seems that we are always paying engineering firms for the jobs that city engineers should be doing anyways.

***Experts are just trained dogs*** Albert Einstein.
I would have thought that Einstein was an expert. :-)
How frequently does the $2M worth of dredging have to be done? Every year? Every 2 or 3 years?

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17146291

The quoted information is from the abstract of the study (note, a study in this case means actually doing what was proposed - dredging - and then finding out how effective the activity was)

"From the magnitude of the sediment transport rate, a return to the initial state of the riverbed (before dredging) may be expected after approximately 10 yr. Despite the scale of the dredging campaign for a river of this size, its results are limited in terms of flood prevention."

I realize the study was done by trained dogs, but hey, that's better than trained elephants. That is why courts always like to make sure that they are getting reports from trained dogs. :-)
Gus, I'm not sure how the meanderind incised river in Belgium compares to the Nechako River, but when I think dredging, as in the confluence of the Nechako and the Fraser, I think that long, deep, and relatively narrow is a good combination that would keep all but the heaviest sediment moving through the trench. Of course the sediment has to settle out somewhere, and I suppose that would be the eventual choke point. It seems to me that the dredging would not have to be repeated for a few years, so if the city dredged every five years, would it not be less costly even in the long run?
metalman.
Einstein was a genius and an authority on experts.(: