City response to spring flooding includes application to provincial disaster assistance program
The City of Swift Current will make an application to the Provincial Disaster Assistance Program (PDAP) for recognition of the spring flooding as an eligible event for any loss or damages experienced by city residents.
Council members approved a motion during a special council meeting on April 26 that the City applies to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Government Relations to be designated an eligible assistance area under the PDAP.
Swift Current Fire Chief Ryan Hunter noted that this program provides emergency funding to municipalities and residents who are affected by a natural disaster.
The situation in the city was a result of rapid snow melt and high temperatures over a very short period, which caused high water levels in the Swift Current Creek. The flooding began on April 11 and the peak flow rate occurred on April 14.
“The repercussions of this flooding may have caused citizens and/or businesses within the city to incur damages that are not covered through their insurance,” he said. “In the event of such circumstances, individuals can seek assistance through the Provincial Disaster Assistance Program. This application process can be accessed through Ministry of Government Relations following a resolution from City council.”
The special council meeting also approved a motion to terminate the local emergency that was in place from April 11-21 as a response to the spring flooding.
Chief Administrative Officer Jim Jones said the City’s emergency operations centre was run by Fire Chief Hunter and General Manager of Infrastructure and Operations Mitch Minken. Staff were deployed from various departments to assist with the placement and creation of barricades as well as with setting up sandbagging stations.
“This provided for different levels of protection with the anticipation of lessening property damage and compromising the City infrastructure,” Jones explained.
The City worked closely with the Water Security Agency to coordinate the outflow of water from Duncairn Dam into the creek.
“Strategically water was released from the dam throughout this time period to allow for the navigation of inflow from the run-off coming from the Cypress Hills region along with any other precipitation,” he said.
Councillors expressed their appreciation toward officials and staff for the effective way the City responded to the situation.
“From the leadership of Fire Chief Hunter in declaring the state of emergency, a very prudent action, and the leadership of our CAO Mr. Jones and Mr. Minken deploying resources,” Councillor Ryan Switzer said. “The cooperation from the Water Security Agency was great to see as well and just a great job by all parties involved. The lines of communication between different agencies were open and there doesn’t appear to be any significant damage. It’s just great to see.”
The City had to respond to a rapidly changing situation due to sudden warming temperatures that increased the run-off. Water flow across the weir at Riverside Park in the city increased from around 1,267 cubic feet per second on April 10 to a high of 3,649 cubic feet per second on April 12. Water levels in the creek at the highest point during the emergency period were close to the flood events of 1997 and 2011.
Water flow levels at the weir remained well above 3,000 cubic feet per second for several days, but started to drop after April 17 and it was at 702 cubic feet per second on April 20.
Hunter and Minken reflected on the City’s response to the spring run-off during media interviews after the special council meeting.
“Everything melted in a very short period of time,” Hunter said. “That’s what made this one so difficult, because all the water we had came in a very short period of time. Normally we don’t see those kinds of melts. … So it was quite difficult to manage in the fact that it came very quickly. We went from below average to normal runoff to maximum runoff in about a 24-hour period.”
The amount of runoff that might still be coming from the Cypress Hills area was an unknown factor during this period.
“That was my main concern,” he said. “We were already flowing at max water flows or near max capacity and we did not know what Cypress Hills was doing, and whether it was melting and coming at that time or whether it was going to be a bit delayed.”
A turn in the weather and lower temperatures helped to slow down the rate of snowpack melt in the Cypress Hills area, but as a precautionary measure the barricades remained in place even after the local emergency ended.
Minken felt the rapid deployment flood control barrier bag system made a big difference to the City’s ability to respond to the fast-changing situation.
“In comparison to making and placing small bags by hand, we did this in probably a tenth of the time that you would ever do trying to do it with manual labour and small sandbags,” he said. “This technology is amazing and how quickly you can put that together. We put together about 750 metres of protection in the space of three days. In 2011 we were at this for two weeks with a hundred or more people doing major manual labour. So this technology is amazing.”
An important factor in the City’s response was the work done since the previous flood in 2011 to gather relevant information, which was applied effectively during this spring runoff.
“We did a lot of survey work and identifying the low-lying areas and identifying which areas should be protected and how that protection would look, which made it much simpler this time,” he said.
“We basically deployed a plan that was developed coming out of the 2011 event. We also had all our resources in place. In the space of three days we had all those barriers in place.
That’s because we had the barriers in our inventory ready to go. All that planning from before made this a relatively simple deployment. We just were able to get our guys to work with the machines and get the local suppliers to bring the material to fill the bags and away we went.”
Minken estimated the cost of the City’s response in dealing with this year’s spring flooding was between $200,00 and $250,000 for the use of equipment and staff to implement the protection measures.
“We’re still doing some assessment on where we are with damages that were done,” he said. “We know we’ve got some damage to the roadway and we’re inspecting the bridge in Riverside Park. … We’re looking at a couple of spots where the water has scoured the creek bank and as to whether or not those will need to be repaired or where we are that way.”
Hunter indicated that all the agencies involved in responding to the flood situation will be carrying out a review of the process.
“What we’re going to do now is see what each agency brings forward to how we can improve for if and when the next time comes,” he said.
He felt it is important to clearly record these details and to ensure this information is available to be used by individuals responsible for dealing with future flood incidents.
“In the past, we got a flood like this approximately every 12 to 14 years,” Hunter said.
“So my biggest takeaway is to put down all the notes that we gained from the successes we had from this flood and put it down with all the agencies involved so that we can hand it down to the next people coming. … We need to leave this information so that people who fill our spots don’t have to start from ground zero. They get to start with all the information that we’ve already been through so they can have a lot higher chance of success.”