Comment received in the news feed on November 6th by user MooreBeach

MooreBeach 2 days ago

We are the owners of 93-2 and 94-2 Bruce Beach Road. We have been coming to the beach for over forty years and have owned 94-2 for the last twenty years. In all that time we have noticed occasional flooding at the north end for a few days in the spring during most years. It has never been a problem for us. Perhaps there is more focus on this issue due to the increasing number of year round residents. However, reading the comments this appears not to be the case for all. We have certainly been coming to our cottage year round for the last 20 years and we don’t have any concerns.94-2 is adjacent to one of the creeks that comes down from Lake Range Road. In our 20 years we have seen it come over the banks three times that we know of. Last year it blew out the culvert because the creek had filled with fallen branches that flowed down the ravine and blocked the culvert during a particularly bad storm.Even with that unusual amount of water, and the blocakge, our cottage was not impacted.As some other commenters have already said, some ravine maintenance can go a long way to resolving this without spending so much money. This creek bed is dry most of the year and only has water flowing after rainfalls. Perhaps clearing and widening /channelling the watercourse would be more effective use of taxpayers dollars. Maybe a larger culvert should have been installed when it was replaced.As the lands along much of the beach area, and in particular the hill between Lake Range and Bruce Beach Raods, are under the control of the conservation authority, do they not have some responsibity or authority to address some of the issues related to the runoff. As environmentally protected areas the landowners are not allowed to do much themselves without much due process. All in all, the flooding problems are not a major concern to us at this point. The inconvenience of the few days of spring flooding at the north end is manageble. The widened ditch at the north end certainly had a positive affect on reducing the flooding, so maintaining, widening and /or extending it a little further south seems like a good start. We are supportive of an incremental approach to solving the problem as opposed to spending a significant amount of money and charging it to the area residents in what appears to be a very arbitrary way.We also agree with other commenters that maintenance of the roads is a normal municipal maintenance responsibility, that should not be assessed to owners on a specific road. We see ditches being worked on along various concession roads in the area. Is that work being assessed to the owners along those stretches?As we are neither contributers to the problem or willing beneficiaries of the solution we cannot support such an extreme expenditure nor assessment.Also of note, we have tried to contact Jim Hanna twice this year by email (no response) suggesting that the first step to mitigting Bruce Beach Rd flooding would be to better enforce the existing Tree Retention Bylaw(2011-85). It seems more than a coincidence that the area of the worst spring flooding is also the area where recent clear cutting has occurred east of the road.David and Heather Moore 94-2