THAT Council decide on the following options:
• Direct staff continue designing and moving forward with the existing option of re- routing canal with the gravity 96″ pipe along Hwy 97 at Gallagher Lake at a cost of 13.2 million dollars
• Direct staff to start designing and moving forward with a low head siphon design option, at a reduced cost of 7.9 million dollars
• Direct staff to start designing and moving forward to look into a alternate intake at Buchanan Drive at a cost of 7.2 million dollars OR
• Direct staff to provide more information an any new or previously mentioned options.
Staff feel that looking at the new pressurized ‘low head’ option with 60″ pipe may be a more
viable choice financially and with a reasonable operational cost increase.
Our Engineering consultants (TRUE) have given us two more options to consider for the Gallagher siphon fix and have provided information, with financial data, on the existing option/fix we have been looking at as well as; alternate intake at Buchanan Road and also an alternate design with a ‘low head siphon’ option.
Gallagher 96″ Option (existing) – this option continues to use the canal system and re-routing only a portion of the canal system away from the problem rockfall area. The problem with this design/construction is the size of pipe required and excavation installation complexities (larger
and deeper installation). With estimated costs now growing to $13 million range, the Town will be short on funding and be required to borrow more money than initially anticipated, especially with no federal grant available. It is also noted that this 96″ pipe is specialty pipe and increase costs for fittings and purchasing the pipe. This option only adds a minimal amount of labour costs/maintenance to future operation budgets.
New Option #1 – Alternate Intake at Buchanan Drive – overall this option will add more yearly operation costs and there are still some unknowns in regards to if or what is required for a proper intake structure in the Okanagan River. With a new pumphouse building and high horse power motors and controls, this option adds a lot of operational time and maintenance to the already higher capital construction costs. On the positive side, this option would forgo many kilometers of canal, dam diversion and fish screen for future operation and maintenance upgrades but we feel the construction costs out weigh the future benefits of less canal upgrades. and controls, this option adds a lot of operational time and maintenance to the already higher capital construction costs. On the positive side, this option would forgo many kilometers of canal, dam diversion and fish screen for future operation and maintenance upgrades but we feel the construction costs out weigh the future benefits of less canal upgrades.
New Option #2 – Low Head Siphon – although this option adds some annual maintenance costs, it is far less than the Buchanan intake option and can be deemed reasonable since we would be adding a new pumping station on the canal. This option is best overall if we have to finance some of the capital costs of any three options. This options would follow the existing 96″ siphon routing but saves the Town in pipe and construction costs reducing to 60″ pipe. Staff have been told that 60″ pipe is a more common size for repair or replacement where 96″ pipe is a specialty size and fittings are very expensive as well, in North America.