Flood Risk: A Community Conversation

Why is there not a way to close the storm drains that empty into the Clearwater River?

Continue working on current flood mitigation for downtown.

In the spring when break up approaches, have sand bags and pumps ready in the downtown area. Be proactive!

Back flow prevention lower townsite Sanitary sewer

Back flow valves on sanitary sewer need to be mandated in lower townsite. All properties below 250.2 should be required to have them installed under a permit process Bi annual inspection required by certified trades. Cost offset over 3 years through a municipal tax credit scheme. City has done an excellent job on engagement and my hat goes off to the city Taiga nova- no buyout Review integrity of storm sewer Re design and install back flow protection as taiga nova flooded bottom up Area is a slot and will do well if emergency pumping is required, should the back flow protection leak. So if possible check the storm sewer and set up (prior to break up )6 times 12 inch pumps for leakage return. No buyout for taiga nova should be required based on this years flood. As the berm was not breached. Need manual valves and emergency pumps for surface run off in taiga nova. Close 72 hours prior to break up And prepare battery of pumps should surface rain be an issue. Critical stores ie Canadian tire could be protected better by "building design upgrades "to ensure they can block water out with a level increase of 1 meter direct against building. Dyeing to 250.5 should see them with same protection. All buildings left operating in the lower townsite may benefit from enhanced water ingress protection though design/ modification of existing doors/ windows/ sewer back flow protection. No more development in lower townsite would be prudent.

The municipality gave the okay for development in flood zones. Only offer buyouts or land swaps to people who want them.

Support Buyout

Strongly in support of a buyout. The recommendation to mitigate flood risk in Longboat Landing by completing a berm and limiting further development in this area is case in point that Longboat Landing should NOT have been approved in the first place. If a berm will solve the problem - then why include limiting further development in the area as part of the recommendations? It doesn't take much to read between the lines that the "berm" solution is a financial bandaid, not a targeted solution to support community resilience. We feel betrayed by the municipal government ever approving development with full knowledge that flood mitigation was not in place in this area. Proposed plans to limit/halt any further development and building a berm (to be completed in an uncertain time frame), along with potentially buying out neighbouring communities like WaterWays and Ptarmigan Court will decimate the Longboat Landing neighbourhoods. Who will ever want to purchase our property or even rent in an area where there is no hope for future development. Owners are essentially trapped in a property that is un-sellable and uninsurable. That is if we can afford our insurance costs going forward. Condo fees may break us. Our Condo Boards will struggle to procure reasonable insurance as the proposed berm is not a guarantee and the area will still be considered an at risk area by insurers. It is inevitable that insurance fees will rise greatly if insurance can even be found. We are hard working professional people who are for the first time in our lives in fear for our financial future. We were MISLED when we purchased our brand, new townhome in 2016. Moving into the community from another province we were not made aware of the fact that we were purchasing in a flood run off zone. We looked forward to contributing to our community and making a life in Fort Mcmurray. We trusted that the proper approvals would have been put in place by the municipal government when we viewed plans for an entire development (which looked amazing in the plans) was built to ensure public safety. Property by a river is lucrative in Ontario and we are duped into believing it would be the same here in Fort Mcmurray. As a city we speak about incentives to lure people here. Let's take care of the citizens who are already here and make right with us. A fair buyout is necessary and supported.

Strongly support buyout

I strongly support a fair buyout. The proposed recommendation of building a berm is as others here have stated essentially a “bandaid” solution. It does not solve the problem 100% of potential flooding again, and it also does absolutely nothing to fix the issues owners are currently facing in regards to sky rocketing condo fees, the ability to obtain insurance to our homes and belongings, and ever being able to rent or sell in the future as a direct result of this flood. Also the proposed limit of further construction in the area makes no sense. If the berm was going to fix the problem, why limit new construction? It is the negligence of the city led to the current situation we are facing. Their approval to ever allow construction in this area (flood zone) has placed residents at risk of physical and great financial harm. The city knew at the time that flood mitigation was not in place. My recommended outcome would be a fair buyout of the amount owing on my mortgage, so that my family is not forced into bankruptcy by a home that is no longer sustainable. A home that is uninsurable and unsellable. A fair buyout is necessary.

We strongly support buyouts, it will be impossible to sell our unit with the current issues.

We were some of the first owners in the Rohit units, we are on the park corner, we had enjoyed our time there, but are unable even to help our renters to move as the can't enter the parking area. It would be impossible to either sell or rent the unit under the recent situation. It seems that we purchased unliveable properties at a high cost. We purchased in 2009.

FULLY SUPPORT BUYOUT AT ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE

The proper assessment and due diligence was not completed when the development was approved by RMWB. We purchased our property in 2011 at market value and it is now valued at less than half of the original purchase price. Residents will see further decline in value going forward because of problematic issues with the area. Properties in Longboat Landing are NOT sell-able or rent-able. The residents of this area will have insurance problems going forward causing further hardship. This development should have never been approved by RMWB, therefore they need to do what is right and offer full buyouts.

Flood Mitigation

My preference is not to move and be forced with a buy out. With that being said if the city cannot address the issue of the water back up through the storm sewers that affected some of the community and the berm can not be built to successfully help prevent flooding than we may have no option. I realize you cannot fully guarantee that the area will not be affected by a flood again, but I would hope the proposed berm would extend far enough to help prevent what we had happen this year. My other concern with the buy out option is how the properties will be appraised to get a fair offer for the properties. If this is the way the city decides to go, I would hope to get some more information on how this process works. I have no interest in a land swap proposal. If you do a proposal where you only buyout people that want to be bought out than you are essentially forcing everyone to take that offer. For those residents that leave the complex the remaining owners will have to pick up the costs for their share of the condo fees. This will obviously increase the cost of living in our complex. Also, this will have an impact on those who want to try and sell in the future and would have a negative impact on our home values. Fortunately, our townhouse corporation was covered by overland flood insurance for the rebuild. I previously had tried to get overland flood insurance for personal contents a few years ago but was not successful. Now I worry if our townhouse corporation will be able to get overland flood insurance in the future and at what cost.

Options for Ptarmigan

I have mixed feelings about all this. I wish I was able to attend the open house but hopefully this will be read/heard. Full Buyout: I would only support this if the buyouts are actually fair and reasonable. I would not accept a buyout for any less than the assessed value of my home/property. Land swap: I don’t feel strongly for this for a few reasons. How does this work? Will the RMWB pay for the decommissioning of each property, transportation of the home/any accessories included with the property, hook up costs, and getting the property to the same position as it was on the current piece of land? I will not be digging into my savings further to pay for these items. Who takes control to ensure all the items are complete? I do not want to have to go through the whole process of permitting/getting contractors to get my property back to the way it was just after getting my home to a state where I would say it is fully completed. Partial Buy out: What does this entail? I haven’t seen any information on this. Raising homes above 250m: Some what agree to this to a point. But who foots the bill to completing this and all the adjustments along with it? Will flood mitigation still go ahead if this were to happen?

Buy out / land swap. Build new trailer park in Parsons creek or Gregoire

I support a partial buyout and Land swap. Possibly build a new trailer park in Parsons creek or Gregoire.

Supporting buy out

I own 34 pelican drive as rental property and believe the buy out option is a good one as long as the prices paid out are fair