A Winnipeg Visit: Journeying through water and time

A few months ago, at the height of the wet weather in our area, I got into my car and drove up to Winnipeg. As much as the initial thought was to just get an idea of how a diversion project works in real life, it was a deeper experience — a kind of “time travel,” if you will.

?Why “time travel?”

?Because to visit Winnipeg is to learn a lot both about what our area will be like in 20-40 years, and to have a chance to look back at what building something like the FM Area Diversion would have been like back in 1968.

?The most jarring thing about looking at Winnipeg’s Floodway nearly a half century after its construction is that it is just part of the landscape — not only in terms of how it looks and how people cross it and back, but also in terms of how it is governed, managed, and maintained.?

?There is no “Metro Winnipeg Flood Diversion Authority.” There’s no one taking specific responsibility for the Floodway’s operation and maintenance. Instead, the Floodway is just a part of the Province of Manitoba infrastructure, maintained comparably to any other waterway, highway, or other piece of public infrastructure. It’s like, say, I-29 or a bridge over the Sheyenne River here. It’s just part of the scene, not belonging to any distinct entity, not sparking much thought or discussion unless there’s some problem.

?As someone seeking to learn from Winnipeg’s experience, this is a bit of a pity. I don’t have a counterpart in Winnipeg who could tell me the story, advise what we should learn from, or share what we should avoid doing.?

?But it’s also obvious to the observer that Winnipeg’s Floodway has played a major role in defining a metropolitan area that has gone from 433,000 in 1960 to 833,000 today.

?Since Winnipeg built its floodway, there hasn’t been a need for sandbags. The diversion has saved the city on many occasions.

The Floodway is activated at least twice as often as we’d expect the FM Area Diversion to operate. Since its completion in 1968, it has performed reliably.?

?Watch how it works: www.cbc.ca/player/play/914702403751

?About a decade ago, the main channel needed to be expanded. It’s about twice the size of our planned stormwater diversion channel — an expansion that cost about $600 million (U.S.) and will manage a 250-year flood event. Based on what I saw, I’d put a $10 billion price tag on the entire Winnipeg project in todays dollars.

?It was both amazing and humbling to see Winnipeg’s Floodway operate. Standing in the control room, I was instantly able to visualize our own control room that will open in a few years’ time.

?Granted, there are some differences. The control structure I visited on the Red River in Winnipeg doesn’t block the water with its gate but restricts the flow. It’s still a sight to see, a triumph of human ingenuity over nature’s destructive side.

?The context in which the Winnipeg floodway was built is much different, as well. Someone driving across the border will see a huge difference between the farms on the Canadian and U.S. sides – with the U.S. operations tending to be newer and larger. I suspect that the stakeholders in Winnipeg weren’t as vocal as ours.

?At the same time, some of the issues we are settling now — the permanent acquisition of flowage easements and land rights — were never settled in Winnipeg. Quite literally, the provincial government goes to court to assess and settle damage claims whenever their diversion operates.?

When you look at Winnipeg’s diversion channels, you see that they didn’t need the kind of support infrastructure, in terms of road crossings and bridges, for instance, that we have built into the design for the FM Area Diversion. Rather than traditional roads and bridges, they have temporary gravel roads that wash away with every flood event and then are rebuilt.?This reflected the lower population pressures of the 1960s. Indeed, the 19 bridges our diversion channel will represent a significant portion of the work we must do.

?It was fascinating to visit Winnipeg and look at it with the lens of our region and our experience. There is much we can learn but also much we can be proud of in terms of our own approach to the same basic challenge. It was invigorating to see first-hand how flood-prevention infrastructure can create a great future for a city and a region.??