After decades, city may take a hard look at its water system

“It’s not stagnant, it’s not steady,” he said of the citizens’ water use. “There’s a peak in the morning when everybody gets up, there’s a peak at the dinner time. There’s a peak at … noon. And all of that has to be taken into consideration because you also have to have, on top of having enough water to supply all the residents, you have to have enough water in reserve and pressure in reserve, in case there’s a fire demand.”

Hicks noted this is something that has not been reviewed in nearly 40 years.

The city hasn’t taken a look at the capacity of its water system since 1982, updating a 1974 water study, according to Hicks’ report. The 1974 study found that the water plant was capable of producing about 13,310,216 litres of water each day for a population of 28,464 in 1972.

Its only study of the sewer system’s capacity was undertaken in 1975, and the city has never studied its storm sewer system.

Then, in 1988 and 1995, two separate internal reports stated the need for the city to study its systems once more. Nothing ever came of these recommendations.

According to Hicks’ report, when the city brought in AECOM to complete the West Hill Master Plan, it created a future growth model for the area that found the sewers that existed underground in 1999 were “undersized.”

The province’s health records show that in 2012, the city’s population stood at 43,222. The water treatment plant now produces an average of 17,664,000 per day. And by 2013, the city had 213 kilometres of pipes in the ground.

“The critical issue is that water system must push 33 [per cent] more water through 30 [per cent] more water mains to 52 [per cent] more people who now live up to 37 [per cent] farther from the water plant or the nearest storage reservoir,” Hicks wrote.

The new study will need to look at the ability of the city’s system to handle growth.

“Because, if we bring on a new neighbourhood, or a large development, maybe a large multi high-rise complex … what will that do to our water system? And also, what will that do to our sewer system?” he asked.

The third leg of the inquiry is how much the storm sewer system could handle. Hicks pointed to the fact that after a heavy rainfall, sometimes a bit of water may back up on the street.

“Well, as the city grows, if we don’t look at what our existing storm sewer can handle, and you keep continuing adding neighbourhoods, how do you know what the breaking point is? How do you know when you’re at 100 per cent capacity until it’s too late? So, the idea of the study is to calculate that out in advance, so then you know you can plan, say ‘this new neighbourhood is going to need a new storm main as well.”

The age of the pipes underground too has an impact, Hicks said. He said the cast-iron pipes in the oldest part of the city slowly build up a deposit inside of them. “That reduces the flow capacity of those pipes,” he said.

On first glance, one may question where the funding for this study is coming from, Coun. Martin Ring said during Monday’s executive committee meeting. The funding comes from levies from new land development, and it’s important to the new land developments as well as the rest of the system to understand where we’re at as well, he said.

“It’s being funded out of the new land development levies, and I think we can move forward on that.”

Coun. Rick Orr made note of the potential outcome included in Hicks’ report if council decided to “do nothing” and not look at its hydraulic systems. Hicks wrote that doing nothing would “stall growth” in the city and “become a major liability if the city cannot provide essential services to existing residents and no plan of how to fix it.”

These things keep popping up, Orr said. “Being one year into council, it surprises me the neglect that we’ve had in the past, I guess, from past councils that haven’t wanted to spend money in the future. And I don’t know how we get to the future if we don’t support giving our engineers the chance to understand what we’re going to need to move forward.”

But while it’s risky to “do nothing,” Coun. Ted Zurakowski added that it’s even more risky to spend this money and then to do nothing.

“So, if we are going to go forward with this, then I would look forward to having some action, out of what comes out of this report, out of the study, so that it doesn’t sit there, or so that future councils do not spend money, so I would encourage us to have a plan beyond Year 1 and a capital investment of moving forward so that the information gathered, we can move on.”

The report and its recommendations were forwarded to next week’s council meeting, were members will make their final decision on the proposal.

tjames@panow.com

On Twitter: @thiajames

by Thia James

After decades, city may take a hard look at its water system

What's Trending