Flood Tunnel Rejected Again? **UPDATE** It's being considered - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

ken0042 · 06-13-2014, 12:18 PM

Calgary report puts $457M price tag on flood tunnel

Best route is under Heritage Drive, not along 58th Avenue corridor, city document concludes

That's actually less money that I thought it would be. The question is- should it be something we consider? In Winnipeg the floodway was built in reaction to the 1950 flood and was considered a waste of money until the flood in 1979. Then in 1997 it paid for itself many times over again. Original cost of the Red River Floodway was $63 million ($360 million in today's dollars) and has saved billions.

Or was our flood last year a fluke; not likely to be repeated?

Some info on Winnipeg's floodway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_Floodway

Caged Great · 06-13-2014, 12:22 PM

It's one of those things where it's a waste of money until it's not.

Because this does happen once in a while, it's a good bet that it'll happen again.

Flash Walken · 06-13-2014, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken0042

Calgary report puts $457M price tag on flood tunnel

Best route is under Heritage Drive, not along 58th Avenue corridor, city document concludes

That's actually less money that I thought it would be. The question is- should it be something we consider? In Winnipeg the floodway was built in reaction to the 1950 flood and was considered a waste of money until the flood on 1979. Then in 1997 it paid for itself many times over again. Original cost of the Red River Floodway was $63 million ($360 million in today's dollars) and has saved billions.

Or was our flood last year a fluke; not likely to be repeated?

Some info on Winnipeg's floodway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_Floodway

Insurance corporations don't seem to believe it is a fluke, which would make me inclined to believe the same.

2 Major floods in a decade tells me that even if there isn't another flood for 20 years, when it does eventually happen again, it will be another devastating one. Had it been in place for the last flood, it would have paid for itself, correct?

It think it's sound investment, given that the engineering behind it works as designed.

Hemi-Cuda · 06-13-2014, 12:25 PM

Going by how crazy the weather is getting all over the planet in recent years due to climate change, I'd rather spend the money to get it done now instead of ten times that amount in damages if we get an equal or worse flood

Northendzone · 06-13-2014, 12:31 PM

because the government is so good at estimating the cost of mega projects such as this.......I'd imagine if they started this tomorrow, the actual cost would come in at $850,000,000 easily.........

If it takes a few years to put the shovel in the ground, then the final bill will easily be $1,000,000,000...........

I am unclear how this helps most of your CP'rs who live along the Elbow - how wuill you get your mansions rebuilt yet again?

Table 5 · 06-13-2014, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken0042

Or was our flood last year a fluke; not likely to be repeated?

I think it would be pretty naive to think it won't happen again. Personally, I think we'll see something like the last flood, or worse, within the decade. Climate change is happening whether some believe it or not, and extreme weather events are just a part of life now.

Whether this tunnel helps or not I have no idea, but in general I'd prefer us to be preventive, rather than reactive, to these types of events.

Mazrim · 06-13-2014, 12:56 PM

Great thread title! Has the internet given this project an appropriate nickname yet though?

Table 5 · 06-13-2014, 01:00 PM

Chinese water trap?

nik- · 06-13-2014, 01:07 PM

We'll scream waste of money until we flood again and then we'll scream lack of leadership at not building it.

Jbo · 06-13-2014, 01:11 PM

As someone who was out of my place for 3 months from the flood, followed by seeing the devestation of the floods in UK first-hand, there is almost 0 reason I can find to not build this.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure

btimbit · 06-13-2014, 06:54 PM

Might not need it for 50+ years, it'd still be worth it when the day comes

Ozy_Flame · 06-13-2014, 07:02 PM

The humanity of it all!! won't somebody please please think of the Calgary Sun commenters??

Acey · 06-13-2014, 08:29 PM

Man... they've got to fix Crowchild before they build this thing.

stampsx2 · 06-13-2014, 08:33 PM

Shouldn't insurance foot the bill for part of the project? It would save them from billions of dollars in claims.

SebC · 06-13-2014, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Shouldn't insurance foot the bill for part of the project? It would save them from billions of dollars in claims.

Or they could just up our rates.

Bob · 06-13-2014, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SebC

Or they could just up our rates.

I'm nowhere near a flood-risk area and my rates jumped 20% this year. I think it's time to shop around again.

OldDutch · 06-13-2014, 09:47 PM

Does anyone know the exact specifics of this flood tunnel?

I always assumed that it was to divert the Elbow only, and not the Bow. Yet today I read this

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/al...779/story.html

Quote:

The head of Calgary’s flood panel won’t commit to the $500-million price tag for a proposed diversion tunnel that would drain water from the Glenmore Reservoir to protect downtown communities from future flooding.

While the five-kilometre diversion tunnel would be very effective in protecting downtown Calgary...

Is this factually correct, or a mistake. The Elbow flows no where near downtown, so I would have to think if this article is taken literally, that this would help mitigate the Bow, therefore helping Bowness, Sunnyside, etc?

If so how? Anyone know?

If not, why the heck are they spending this amount on something that won't help the folks on the Bow?

Just really curious as I have never seen an actual detailed explanation anywhere to date.

You Need a Thneed · 06-13-2014, 10:02 PM

It wouldn't protect communities along the Bow.

Bunk · 06-13-2014, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldDutch

Does anyone know the exact specifics of this flood tunnel?

I always assumed that it was to divert the Elbow only, and not the Bow. Yet today I read this

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/al...779/story.html

Is this factually correct, or a mistake. The Elbow flows no where near downtown, so I would have to think if this article is taken literally, that this would help mitigate the Bow, therefore helping Bowness, Sunnyside, etc?

If so how? Anyone know?

If not, why the heck are they spending this amount on something that won't help the folks on the Bow?

Just really curious as I have never seen an actual detailed explanation anywhere to date.

The flooding of East Beltline, and the East Village (including City Hall) - both "downtown" was from the Elbow.

OldDutch · 06-14-2014, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunk

The flooding of East Beltline, and the East Village (including City Hall) - both "downtown" was from the Elbow.

Awesome thanks Bunk. So if we are spending $500 million on this tunnel, do you know what is proposed for the communities on the Bow?

To be honest I think I know, but want to be sure. Restoring the river banks, creating a sump pit(s), automating the gates, and the Ghost Dam agreement is all I have heard. However, there isn't any big new ideas to help us that I know of. Just a bunch of small peace meal ideas.

Is there anything else you can share that I may not have mentioned? Just curious if I have missed something that will significantly help us next time.