Quote:A third-party review being conducted to look at water capacity in Waterloo region after concerns were raised about the impacts of aging infrastructure and a growing population will have in the community.

The Region of Waterloo currently sources its water from a combination of 100 wells and the Grand River.

Mathieu Goetzke is the acting CEO for the region. He says there won't be an impact on residents.

"Nobody's going to stop having water at their tap ... we have enough capacity to supply all of the existing demands," he said, emphasizing that the quality of the water will not be affected.

"The issue that we're seeing is a bit of an imbalance between the historical growth of the region and where the water is in the region to be able to bring it to the residents."

The water capacity issue has been identified in the Mannheim Service Area, which is made up of the most populated areas of Kitchener and Waterloo. It also includes a small portion of Cambridge, Breslau and Elmira.

The region says there is currently a third party taking a look at the service area to get a better idea of the extent of the issue.

Meanwhile, the region says it has expedited timelines to put in new infrastructure and repair aging facilities.

Goetzke says the region has managed to avoid having a water capacity issue until now by conserving water usage efficiently. Today, he says Waterloo region uses the least amount of water per person compared to other municipalities in Southern Ontario.

"People have been doing a lot of efforts for water conservation, but these efforts are plateauing," he explained.

"It's harder to improve your water efficiency because now a lot of the households and everything that's new that's being built has efficient flushes and efficient shower heads. So that effort is done. We can't do better."

'Water is our most valuable asset'
Cambridge Mayor Jan Liggett said "it is of utmost importance that a third-party review is being undertaken" to determine water capacity since the region mostly relies on groundwater.

"Water is our most valuable asset, and we need to ensure at both the upper tier and lower tier level that we are watchful and do our due diligence that the infrastructure our water flows through is working at 100 per cent," Ligett said in a statement.

"Having just completed our city budget and currently undergoing regional budget this is a good reminder how important it is that reserve funds are built up and are used only for that which they are in place for."

(05-11-2021, 08:22 PM)taylortbb Wrote: As someone that was really deeply involved in the approval process for ION I think another $50M in cost would have killed it, and $100M certainly would have.

• Even the planners agree that the uptown and downtown splits are bad, but they don't think the political will for a wider right of way existed at the time.
  
• I think better access to stations would have been good and probably wouldn't have cost that much but it's been a struggle to work this out.
  
• Traynor was a definite mistake. Somewhat expensive but needed to happen.
  
• Unlike ac3r, I do not think that faster rides would have made much of a difference. Montreal's metro isn't really that fast. Realistically, I think that the end-to-end time could have 10 minutes shaved off. Is that going to make a huge difference? And how much does it cost?
  
• We need better headways, but that is supposed to be coming. It is also expensive to buy more trains though.