A study commissioned by the landowners group known as DontDamnSpringbank “contradicts” previous estimates surrounding the Springbank Dry Dam (SR1) provided by the Alberta Government, according to spokesperson Lee Drewry.
“This is clearly (a case) of sacrificing one community to save another one in Calgary,” he said. “We don’t believe we should be the last generation to enjoy this property.”
The report, presented to Rocky View County (RVC) council Feb. 2, was conducted by Power Consulting, Inc., and concludes basic information on the costs and benefits of the SR1 project is “still in flux.”
“Information available on the alternative flood mitigation measures costing hundreds of millions of dollars is not yet reliable enough to support rational decision-making,” the report reads.
The controversial SR1 flood mitigation project was chosen over an alternative McLean Creek Dam option after the government cited lower cost, environmental impact, shorter timelines and the potential to capture more runoff due to SR1’s downstream location.
“Even factoring in pipeline relocation, land acquisition and the cost of building local flood mitigation upstream to protect Bragg Creek and Redwood Meadows, the benefit-cost ratio of the Springbank project (combined with local upstream mitigation) is still superior to the benefit-cost ratio of the McLean Creek Dam,” said Janice Coffin, executive director of the communications branch with Alberta Environment and Parks in an email to the Rocky View Weekly.
“(The Springbank Dry Dam) is expected to deliver a positive return on investment to taxpayers over the long term in the form of flood damages avoided.”
The report issued by Power Consulting claims an increased project scope, uncertain mitigation benefits and price tags based on “unreliable” data have skewed initial data provided by the government.
“I don’t understand how one engineering firm could be stating (one thing) over here and this one (another),” RVC Reeve Greg Boehlke said. “How are we to know which one to believe? But (the Power Consulting report), this one here is truly common sense to me.”
The Alberta Government previously stated the McLean Creek Dam option was also rejected due to a lengthy regulatory approval process. According to Drewry, the review also contradicted that claim.
“In terms of environmental review and construction, SR1 is the expedient solution, the fastest solution,” he said. “Both projects require provincial and environmental review and we believe both projects will require a federal environmental review.”
Coffin, in defending plans to move forward with SR1, pointed out Springbank’s location – being located further down the river, Springbank has a larger catchment area, and its proximity to Calgary means dam operations are “inherently more robust” and accessible.
“Experts, including the highly-respected Dutch research foundation Deltares, recommended this plan because it will provide the best protection, at the best value for taxpayers, while limiting adverse impacts on the environment,” she said.
In light of the conflicting reports, Drewry requested RVC council officially oppose the project until further information be provided. He said SR1 provides “nothing but negative consequences for RVC, and certainly not for those of us who have lived and breathed it for the last two years.”
“We’re compelled as a county to take a position on this. These are landowners who have been here for a generation,” Councillor Eric Lowther said. “We’re asking for a responsible treatment of this issue in a public venue before any decision is made.”
A request will now be made to RVC council to approve a letter to be sent to the Province. That letter will request that no construction be commenced on SR1 until current and accurate information is provided to council.
