Alberta Flood Mitigation Symposium

Andre CorbouldChief Assistant Deputy Minister,

Flood Recovery Task Force

October 4, 2013

2

3

Recovery Principles Leadership and local autonomy Collaboration and coordination Partnerships and inclusiveness Communication Timeliness and flexibility Fairness across flood-affected

communities Resilience Building Alberta together

Psychological and emotional wellness

Individual and family empowerment

Safety Capture lessons learned Plan for transition to normal

services Accountability

4

Recovery Elements PEOPLE•Safety•Health•Social well-being•Mitigation

ENVIRONMENT•Biodiversity, ecosystems & natural resources•Amenities•Waste & pollution management•Mitigation

RECONSTRUCTION•Residential & commercial buildings•Utilities•Infrastructure, communications & transport planning•Parks and recreation•Mitigation

ECONOMY•Individual•Small Enterprise•Medium Enterprise•Large Enterprise•Tourism and Parks•Mitigation

LOCAL COMMUNITY

and STAKEHOLDER

S

Flood Mitigation Framework – Purpose and Principles

• Seek to increase preparedness, protection and resilience– Reduce risk to people, property, communities, infrastructure, environment

and economy

– Clarify 1:100 standard (1% chance in any given year)

• Assess, select, coordinate and implement mitigation measures and policies. Evaluate based on:– Understanding of causes and analysis of risks

– Scientific and engineering assessment of impact and efficacy

– Social, environmental and economic cost/benefit

• Flooding cannot be prevented, but we can be better prepared

Flood Mitigation Framework – Decision Making Process

Key Elements of Mitigation

• Overall Watershed Management

• Flood Modelling, Prediction, and Warning Systems

• Flood Risk Management Policies

• Water Management and Mitigation Infrastructure

• Erosion Control

• Local Mitigation Initiatives – by municipality

• Individual Mitigation Measures for Homes

Watershed Management – “System of Systems”

ApproachFocus on river basins where flooding and drought risks are highest

Consider each river basin as a system

Implement the best combination of upstream, local, individual and policy-based mitigation measures to protect against 1:100 flooding events

Seek to enhance the ability to protect against water shortages as well

Flood Modelling, Prediction and Warning Systems

• Post Flood Assessments Underway– ESRD working with local communities

• Incorporate best practices and technology– ESRD and Environment Canada

– Other jurisdictions – e.g. Colorado, Netherlands

• Updated Flood Hazard Mapping– $8.7 million funding approved

– accelerated mapping of new areas

– updated mapping of high risk communities.

• Floodway Relocation– Voluntary buyout of homes in affected areas

– 100% of tax assessed value

– Maximum 254 properties potentially affected

• Future Floodway Development Restrictions– Amendments to the Municipal Government Act to prohibit new

development in floodways to be proposed in fall legislative session.

• Minimum Individual Mitigation Measures– Homeowners in the flood fringe who access DRP for repairs or rebuilds

must implement minimum mitigation measures in order to remain eligible for DRP in future.

Flood Risk Management Policies andIndividual Mitigation Measures

Flood Recovery Erosion Control – Activities in Progress• FREC Program Overview

– Grants available to FNs and municipalities that declared a SOLE in 2013– $116 million approved for urgent erosion control and smaller-scale community

mitigation projects– Priority given to projects that will be completed by Spring 2014

• Examples of Approved FREC Projects– FREC Grant Approvals

• Canmore : Cougar Creek• Calgary: 52nd St NW • Currently in FREC grant review process: 4 Calgary, 2 MD of Bighorn, 2 MD of

Rocky View, 1 Piikani Nation and 1 Mountain View County– Engineering Approvals (64 projects)

• Canmore, Sundre, Siksika Nation, Cochrane, Okotoks, Crowsnest Pass, High River, MD of Foothills, Black Diamond, and Turner Valley (Note: others being reviewed).

Local Mitigation Measures – Activities in Progress

• Emergency Preparedness– Enhancing emergency stockpiles for all communities (not just for floods)

• High River– Scraping of Highwood River

– Demolition and removal of CP rail bridge

– Town finalizing plan for local dykes/berms

– Independent analysis of Hamptons flooding

• Medicine Hat– City has developed local mitigation plan, including backflow prevention,

improved berm and dyking system, and lift station upgrades.

• Calgary– Flood mitigation panel (Wolf Keller) established and work underway.

Water Management and Mitigation• Full range of measures being evaluated, including:

– Operational changes

– Natural systems

– New and existing infrastructure

– Consideration of land use impacts and groundwater issues

• Government of Alberta Mitigation Team – Advisors:– WaterSMART

– WPACs

– APEGA

– Insurance Bureau of Canada

– TransAlta

• Mitigation Advisory Panel– Chaired by Allan Markin

Water Management and Mitigation – WaterSMART Recommendations• WaterSMART has developed a white paper with detailed recommendations,

including short term (6 month) actions to address the following priorities:

– Anticipate and plan for more extreme weather events

– Improve operational capacity to deal with events through better modelling and data management

– Investigate cost/benefit balance of investing in physical infrastructure such as on and off-stream storage, diversions, and natural infrastructure such as wetlands

– Consider flood risks in municipal planning and strengthen building codes for new development in flood plains

– Evaluate options for overland flood insurance

– Manage water resources collaboratively

• WaterSMART representative (Kim Sturgess) appointed as advisor to GOA Mitigation Team.

Potential Upstream Mitigation – Existing TransAlta Infrastructure

• Further work to be undertaken to evaluate increased mitigation potential of existing infrastructure (storage and/or operations).

• TransAlta representative appointed as advisor to GOA Mitigation Team.

Upstream Mitigation Infrastructure – Potential Concepts

• Flood Detention Sites– Maintain

natural flow in non-flood conditions

• River Bypasses– Move large

volumes downstream beyond areas at high risk

Mitigation Advisory Panel Priorities – Elbow, Highwood and Sheep Rivers

Mitigation Advisory Panel – High River Bypass (Conceptual)

Mitigation Advisory Panel – Current Status

• The Panel has identified a number of potential detention sites and bypasses (shown in the preceding slides).

• Preliminary discussion of these concepts with stakeholders has begun (City of Calgary, Bow River Basin Council, AAMDC).

• RFP concluded and consultants selected for geotechnical and feasibility studies on flood detention sites on Elbow, Highwood and Sheep Rivers and High River bypass.

• The Panel is recommending that work begin as soon as possible on several priority projects.

Normal Regulatory Process for Water Management Infrastructure•Environmental Assessment based on scale and complexity of proposed project. Necessary to determine environmental impacts and assess whether the project is in the public interest.

– The current average length of time until an EIA report is deemed complete is 72 weeks.

• Environmental Assessment is mandatory for: – Water management structures above 15m in height– Diversions with a capacity greater than 15 cubic metres per second– Reservoirs with a capacity greater than 30 million cubic metres

•Approvals under the Water Act, Historical Resources Act, and Public Lands Act would also be required.•Federal processes under the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act would likely occur concurrently.

Principles for Potential Accelerated Review Process

• Must be consistent with spirit and letter of relevant legislation. Overall public interest must be paramount.

• Robust and meaningful consultation will be undertaken:– First Nations

– Municipalities and communities

– Stakeholders

– Public

– Intergovernmental

– Technical and professional

• Process expedited by prioritization of efforts and attention at each stage, and by concurrent work on different aspects

Additional Considerations for Water Management Infrastructure

• Scope and Scale– The potential facilities range in height from 30-50 m and from 600-1100 m in length, with storage capacities from 35-61 Mm3.

• Risk Assessment– The dam safety consequence rating of any potential structures will likely be high to very high due to significant downstream

population at risk. This will set the design criteria.

– Flood control structures must be fully capable of storing large volumes of water at all times

• Feasibility– Critical feasibility study elements include: other flood damage reduction options, cost & benefit analysis, and engineering

performance evaluation of the flood damage reduction plans

– Considerable time is required for field investigations, updating the hydrologic information, modeling studies, laboratory testing, etc., at the feasibility stage to make sure if these site conditions are suitable.

– Updating of the hydrologic information is essential for establishing the Inflow Design Flood and discharge facilities.

• Constructability– Structures are typically constructed during summer months.

– Dry storage ponds located on rivers would still require significant outflow structures

• Ownership and Control– Other critical aspects requiring consideration include: determining the appropriate project proponent, long term ownership,

resources required for operation, maintenance and surveillance, emergency preparedness and response, safety assessments and evaluations etc.

The Next Steps

• Short Term– Aggressively pursue opportunities to increase preparedness for spring

– Continue to implement urgent local mitigation and erosion control projects

– Support communities as they develop local mitigation plans

• Moving forward– Finalize the Flood Mitigation Framework to assist in project evaluation and

determination of priorities. Continue to assess projects from the Mitigation Advisory Panel and other sources.

– Work with GOA departments and the federal government to develop expedited review and approval processes within legislative requirements.

– Continue discussions to build consensus on appropriate strategies and ensure integration of local and provincial plans.

Outcomes from the Symposium

• Share current state of provincial mitigation work

• Receive feedback and ideas on initial plans/concepts

• Encourage development of local mitigation plans; share successes and best practices– E.g. Sundre, Red Deer, Drumheller, Fort McMurray

• Establish avenues for ongoing consultation and input – all ideas are welcome.– Water Portal

Questions

WATER PORTAL – www.albertawater.ca

GOA MITIGATION TEAM – MitigationSecretariat@gov.ab.ca

Chief ADM, Flood Recovery Task Force – Andre Corbould (andre.corbould@gov.ab.ca)

Executive Director, Mitigation, Flood Recovery Task Force – Cathy Maniego (cathy.maniego@gov.ab.ca)