MINTO – Council here has approved the Harriston Flood Mitigation Study and directed staff to work on designs and a financial plan to implement the study’s recommendations, including diversion of the Maitland River around the town.
A resolution, approved unopposed at town council’s Feb. 2 meeting, calls for staff to work with Triton Engineering and Dietrich Engineering to develop detailed designs and formal cost estimates to allow study alternatives two, three and five to be phased in over time as recommended in the study.
Staff was also directed to work with Triton Engineering to develop a financial plan once the scope of the project is finalized.
The resolution also calls for the study to be forwarded to the Maitland Valley Conservation Authority and for the town and authority to “continue their strong partnership as the recommendations are implemented.”
Council had its first look at the report, in the works since a one-in-a-hundred-year flood struck Harriston in 2017, at a special meeting on Jan. 26.
Triton Engineering senior planner Bill White, who presented the report, explained alternative one, which is to “do nothing,” is considered a baseline for comparison with other alternatives:
- alternative two, floodplain hydraulic improvements downstream of Harriston over the next five years at a projected cost of about $2.1 million;
- alternative three, encompassing the work from alternative two, plus downstream river channel improvements over 10 years for around $4.5 million;
- alternative four, dismissed due to lack of benefits in relation to potential cost, included improvements to the river channel through Harriston; and
- alternative five, creation of a Maitland River Harriston bypass from the Blind Line northeast of Harriston to Dredge Creek, just southeast of town.
The diverted river would reconnect with the existing Maitland channel at a point beyond the sewage lagoons west of town.
The estimated capital cost of the river diversion alternative would be $38.1 million over 20 years.
At the Feb. 2 meeting Minto roads and drainage manager Mike McIsaac reported the province had, the previous day, indicated support for the town’s funding application through the latest round of National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP) to prepare final designs for the mitigation work on the section of the Maitland River west of Harriston.
“So we are just awaiting federal approval … which we hope to hear sometime in March,” McIsaac told council.
In his report, McIsaac recommended moving ahead with the design and financial plan aspects of the mitigation study.
However, he noted, approving the study does not commit the town to doing any work until the municipal drain or Class EA processes have been completed and funds are budgeted and allocated.
“Public consultation will continue as required to allow for a smooth project transitioning from property to property and to ensure all voices are heard and addressed,” the report notes.
“Due to the magnitude of the Harriston Flood Mitigation Project, various components will continue to be presented to council for discussion and approval over the upcoming years and budget deliberations,” McIsaac added in the report.
Councillor Ron Elliot asked for more information on why alternative four “was pulled out of the equation.”
McIsaac replied the option was rejected “due to the expense and the limited positive results” in comparison to other options.
“There was a lot of work to underpin the current buildings and with the work associated with it, the results really wouldn’t justify moving forward with that option at this time,” McIsaac explained.
Councillor Judy Dirksen said, “I think it’s fair too to say scenario two and three, they build us toward scenario five, which is where we kinda though we wanted to end up, whereas four didn’t’ help scenario five, so that’s maybe why four maybe got left behind.”
Elliott asked when the project would be budgeted and work would begin.
“Right now if we move forward as proposed with the current NDMP funding we do anticipate that we can basically formalize the plans and come up with cost estimates to complete two and three” and “as much as possible” of alternative five by the time 2022 budget planning gets underway, said McIssac.
“We would hope that moving forward that we’d be close enough to budget 2022,” that the town could move forward with “some bite-sized components” during 2022, McIsaac added.
CAO Derek Thomson said, “Really our next step is to do the financial model and the plan to bring it back (to council).
“That will help us with the overall plan to start to lobby both levels of government for intense funding. That’s really where we want to go.”
He added, “But in the near term it is (alternatives) one and two that we want to move on quickly, but not to lose sight of five, because you need to get a head start on five and really need that package to be able to go lobby different levels of government,”
“I think it’s a good sign to us, having the provincial government endorse this (the NDMP grant) and the sooner that the feds can do it as well. We have their attention and I think it’s important that we all understand what these steps are about … this is a big, big project and we have spent money already and were kind of committed, but the big deal is the funds,” said deputy mayor Dave Turton.
Mayor George Bridge said, “When we say we are committed, we are committed to the process. We haven’t committed to anything as to what were actually going to finally do.”
McIsaac’s report points out that, “Due to the magnitude of the Harriston Flood Mitigation Project, various components will continue to be presented to council for discussion and approval over the upcoming years and budget deliberations.”
“But at the end of the day I totally agree that we said to our residents that we’d come up with some kind of a plan and I’m really hopeful that the federal government will endorse, and we’ll get that first funding that we need,” said Bridge.
“Then we’re going to have to figure out just how were going to pay for it down the road.”
Elliott asked McIssac what will happen to the existing river channel if full river diversion is achieved.
“When and if we did scenario five and moved (the river) around the community, will there still be water going through Harriston? Would there be two waterways, or how is that working?” Elliott asked.
McIsaac replied, “There would be some control flows going through town because it still acts as the outlet for the municipal storm system. So there would be continuous flows throughout and I do believe they would maintain a certain level of constant flow.
“We need some flows for the effluent, the discharge, of the lagoon system as well, so we need to maintain certain levels for different seasons.”
