City
should make Idlewild Dam report public
Perceptions
by Gerry Warner
This
week, thanks to a request I made to City staff, I obtained copies of the
Idlewild Dam Breach Inundation Study prepared by Urban Systems for the City as
well as a letter to the City from Sarah Crookshanks, senior regional dam safety
officer.
I
commend City staff for making these documents available to me because they are
critical in understanding the work the City is carrying out now on Idlewild Dam
which could result in the dam being in a reduced state of operations for two
years or more and Idlewild Lake being lowered and possibly completely drained
for the same period of time.
This, of course, would be a major loss of
one of the City’s prize recreational assets for more than 50 years, a decision
not to be made lightly. Were there other options? Unfortunately, we’ll never
know because City Council chose to make the decision secretly in camera and not
let Cranbrook residents and taxpayers in on the discussion.
Perhaps there was a good reason for
councillors to have their initial discussion in camera until they understood
all the implications of the engineering study and the safety officer’s letter.
That way they could have prepared themselves for an informed discussion in
public and a public vote. That’s good governance. Council could also have
recommended both documents be made available to the public at City Hall so that
taxpayers and residents could examine the documents themselves and raise questions
they had at a future council meeting.
Instead of doing this, the City issued a
press release saying Council made its in camera decision based on the “findings
and recommendations” of the engineering study, but did not say what those
findings and recommendations were. Now that I’ve had the opportunity to read
the engineering report, I can tell you that one of its recommendations was for
“information to be shared with the general public.”
So much for accountable municipal
government!
Anyway, I’m no engineer, but I am a
journalist with more than 30 years experience informing the public of what
their politicians are doing – and not doing in many cases – and I’d like to
inform you now of some of the key information I found in the documents.
The dam has a concrete, internal spillway without
the capacity to handle the maximum flood possible referred to as an inflow
design flood (IDF). This could lead to water spilling over the crest of the dam
and eroding the downstream face of the structure leading to a complete dam
failure and significant flooding in the city and possible loss of life. The
report goes on to say: “The City should consider either increasing the spillway
capacity to accommodate the IDF or armouring the downstream face of the dam to
prevent erosion of the downstream embankment in the event that the dam is
overtopped.” This would reduce the Dam Consequence Classification currently
rated as “high” and “significantly reduce the probability of a dam breach due
to overtopping,” the report says.
Whew! Do you really think this information
shouldn’t be shared with you who live downstream of the Idlewild Dam? Are you
satisfied with the dam danger being “significantly reduced” or should the whole
damn dam be replaced?” Would it not be possible to simply increase the height
of the dam and reduce the danger completely? Could an emergency ditch be
constructed around the dam to reduce the flood danger like the diversion ditch
the City constructed around the Phillips Reservoir? What are the cost numbers?
Were other options considered? How long will we be without a lake?
These are only a few of the questions that
occur to me and they may not even involve lowering the lake. I’m sure Cranbrook
residents, being the intelligent people they are, could think of many more. Too
bad Council doesn’t trust us to think for ourselves.
Given this, like me, make a modest
suggestion. I suggest Cranbrook Council call a public meeting to receive input
on whether the City should proceed on its current course regarding Idlewild
Dam.
In my opinion, it’s the least Council
should do.
Gerry
Warner is a retired journalist and former councillor.
Mayor and council off to a very poor start as legislators. Not instilling a lot of confidence in the minds of ratepayers with what seems to be a lack of communications and inexperience. Disappointing right now.
ReplyDelete