Citizens shut out of meetings

Aylmer mobilizes to fight demolition of ruins by Transport Quebec

“We need to raise hell,” said Howard Powles, Deschênes Rapids Association (DRA) president, after learning, in a February 14 meeting, that Transport Quebec (MTQ) plans to destroy the Deschênes Rapids ruins.

“We have significant concerns with the whole thing, such as the fact that this has all been done behind closed doors. The preliminary decision was taken by the MTQ in 2014. There were subsequent meetings with the city, the latest in November 2016. We’re unhappy that the MTQ did not break this news to us earlier,” said Powles.

The MTQ owns the ruins and nearby land and is responsible for safety there. The ministry obtained the land from Hydro-Québec about a decade ago when the MTQ was acquiring land with the plan to build a commuter corridor and a new bridge to Ontario in the city’s west end.

 

“The decision to demolish the ruins was considered appropriate to ensure the safety of residents,” said Karine Sauvé, MTQ spokesperson for Outaouais, although two other options were available: adding a riprap or installing a barrier boom to keep boaters and others away from the ruined dam.

According to Powles, restoring the unmaintained dam is out of the question. “As soon as you start messing with it, you destroy its heritage value. It has been ignored over the years and has become a very fragile structure,” he told the Bulletin.

Deschênes stonewalled on ruins request

Asked why the meetings were all held behind closed doors, Sauvé said that “the decision to hold in-camera meetings is explained by the willingness to be able to present all possible options for this project and to have a frank discussion on each of them with City Council.” She added, “the councillors and the mayor represented the population.”

According to Sauvé, there’s no firm date for demolition, but Powles informed the Bulletin he was told it would be in 2018. The big question for Powles is where did the idea to demolish the dam come from. The DRA had submitted a request to the city in 2013 to classify the whole rapids site as an historic landscape, which would have protected the dam. However, the city never acted on the request.

No threats to safety from dam

“We know the idea to demolish the ruins is based on safety; the fire department says it is unable to rescue people from the dam, and I understand that, but the risk of someone getting in there is very low. Since 2010, there were no incidents involving the dam in that area -- according to statistics we obtained from an access to information request.

 

“There were some incidents involving people leaving Britannia Bay (in Ottawa) who drowned after going over the rapids, but the dam was not involved. We realize it’s a dangerous place, but the probability of people going in there is very low,” argued Powles.

According to Sauvé, in the past decade there have been 20 safety interventions near the rapids “because of the dam”.

“We realize there will still be a risk, but they (the dam’s ruins) make the area even more dangerous. The structure is hazardous and some parts might fall. We will remove the whole structure and the site will return to its natural state,” said Sauvé.

According to Powles, the dam is now part of the landscape and should be conserved. “When people cycle and walk by, they stop to look at the dam and it arouses curiosity. Having it there is important for the community,” he said. The MTQ conceded it will find ways of commemorate the dam’s historical value.

Micheline Lemieux, Aylmer Heritage President, hopes the MTQ is not considering simply installing a historical plaque indicating that “a dam was here”.  She said a plaque will be ”uninspiring”.

Added Lemieux, “We need to save the dam. It’s not because something is dangerous that we destroy it. If that were true, highways would be demolished. We believe the dam is important. People settled in Deschênes primarily because of the dam, which powered this community. I also think it would be more dangerous is the dam was removed. Today people don’t venture there because of the dam’s ruins, but if it was removed, people might risk going through the rapids.”

Cheaper options

According to Powles, the MTQ would be better off fixing the erosion at the banks of the river “which could be fixed for a fraction of what it would cost to demolish the dam. Fencing along the edge would be much more effective. There are many other things that could be done at a lesser cost,” he said. “The cost-benefit study is unfavourable and has not been done with any rigour. The MTQ said destroying the ruins will cost between $1 and $1.5 million, but we believe it will cost over $5 million. There are many uncertainties when you must dry out a river (of this size). To demolish the dam, the contractor will need to build a cofferdam upstream to isolate the site and then remove the water. The costs are clear but the benefits remain unproven.”

According to Lemieux, the MTQ would be better off investing in making Highway 50 safer. “If safety is the issue,” she says.