After suffering through a serious flood last month, residents on Harris Street in Rockwood now face a weeks-long closure of their road, which has led to overwhelming anger and frustration.
“We are no longer just inconvenienced – we are pissed off and we’re scared,” resident David Clarke said to agreement from many of the 30-plus people who attended a public meeting on Monday night.
Residents were told at the meeting that in order to provide a long-term solution to flooding in the area – including the Jan. 13 flooding caused by the failure of a nearby stormwater pond – developer Charleston Homes will be installing a large drain pipe that requires a four- to six-week road closure, starting as soon as Feb. 7.
Clarke said he is tired of Charleston Homes – the township has blamed the developer was responsible for the Jan. 13 flood – “passing the buck” when it comes to both repairing damage to nearby homes and a lack of communication with residents regarding the pending road closure and construction.
Amec’s Angelo Cutaia, an engineering consultant hired by Charleston Homes, said the company was waiting on two Ministry of Transportation (MTO) permits for the drain pipe project, the last of which was received on Jan. 28.
He said notices went out to residents as soon as word was received last week of the MTO approval.
Cutaia said the reason for the road closure is the “mere magnitude” of the drain pipe, which is about a meter in diameter. He added it is unclear exactly how long the road will be closed, but he estimated the project could take six to eight weeks to complete, with the road closed for four to six weeks.
Cutaia also explained the contractor in charge of the project was told to minimize the impact on residents, including escorting them across the construction site, and emergency services personnel will be able to access the site via a private road (as will residents, albeit at their own risk).
Yet several residents questioned the logistics, timing and lack of communication regarding the road closure – including a school busing change that allegedly has children walking across a nearby railroad crossing to catch their bus.
When contacted for details, Upper Grand District School Board spokesperson Maggie McFadzen confirmed letters were sent on Feb. 5 by Wellington Dufferin Student Transportation Services to the parents of affected Rockwood students.
“Due to student safety we don’t publicize the bus stops,” McFadzen said in an email. “The affected students will have a bus stop that is not in the construction zone. Bus drivers will notify secondary school students directly.
“This is the usual practice, as transportation gets many detour notices each school year.”
At the Feb. 4 public meeting resident Brian Devries said Charleston’s handling of the flood and the road closure are simply the latest in a long line of concerns residents have had about the developer.
“What I’m hearing is complete dissatisfaction since the first flood six years ago,” Devries said.
He added residents don’t believe the proper precautions were taken for the drain pipe construction and he wondered aloud why Charleston was not fixing flood damage immediately.
“There’s no trust whatsoever,” Devries said.
Resident Marty Durksen echoed that sentiment, questioning the “stupidity” that led to the problems and calling the current situation “a circus.”
“We don’t believe anything they say,” Durksen said of Charleston Homes officials. “They have no credibility any more.”
Charlie Kuiken, president of Charleston Homes, apologized to residents and township officials for the damage caused by the Jan. 13 flood.
“I sincerely regret the impact that we’ve caused … We realize it’s been an inconvenience for [residents],” said Kuiken.
He said his company has opened an insurance claim to help those affected, but the incident is still being investigated by the insurance company, which has led to delays in possible resolutions.
“We’re quite frustrated with the time it’s taking as well,” Kuiken said.
He later added, “Rest assured we’re doing what we can to push our insurance company.” But Clarke, and several other residents, were not convinced.
“I don’t want to hear any more excuses,” Clarke said sternly.
Several residents said they want information regarding the road closure – including access, traffic management, parking and emergency response plans – in writing.
“Quite frankly, you should have had that a month ago,” Mayor Chris White said, adding the township would try to facilitate the notice.
White said township officials are not pleased with the Jan. 13 flood or the road closure and they will try to mitigate the impact on residents if at all possible. However, the mayor stopped short of offering any financial relief for residents.
“This is not a taxpayer expense. At the end of the day … the developer pays all those charges,” White said. He later added, “[The township] didn’t do it. We’re not responsible.”
Several other residents also complained about the noise from the pumping at the stormwater pond since last month’s flood.
Gord Feniak, an R.J. Burnside and Associates engineer hired by the township, said he is comfortable with interim measures taken to address possible flooding on the site.
He said his firm has also approved the project to install the larger drainage pipe, as has the Grand River Conservation Authority and at least one provincial ministry.
At the start of the meeting Feniak went over his firm’s report on the Jan. 13 flooding, which concludes, it “was an isolated incident caused by the subdivision not yet having an adequate drainage outlet and by the developer installing temporary works on an ad hoc basis and then failing to maintain them properly.”
“That is our version of events,” Feniak told council, noting not everyone agrees with that assertion.
“We feel confident reporting to you that this is the way it happened, to the best of our knowledge.”
When pressed by a resident if anyone has formally assumed liability for the flooding, Kuiken said only that his company’s insurance provider is investigating.
When another resident asked why the developer could not immediately fix the damage and figure out the financial details later, Kuiken did not offer a response, other than “no comment.”
Following Monday night’s meeting several residents expressed frustration that they received unsatisfactory answers – or none at all – to many of their questions.
