Randle Reef

[adam]

Don't worry - we're going to get a major glut in the commercial markets very soon - won't be enough demand to satisfy supersized ships!

[SteelTown]

Randle Reef team seeks $23 million

November 19, 2008
Jackson Hayes
The Hamilton Spectator

The team behind the Randle Reef cleanup project is still looking for $23 million, but remains confident it will be able to bury the toxic sediment by 2019.

Comments about the budget and the $90-million plan to secure and cover up to 630,000 cubic metres of contaminated sediment in Hamilton Harbour were made at a public meeting last night.

The project team was on hand to answer questions about the process and possible impact of the planned nine years of construction.

Project manager Roger Santiago, who said Environment Canada would not let him answer questions from the news media, told the assembly the Hamilton Port Authority and the city are working on raising the $30-million local share.

"We are looking at stakeholder groups and there is a large amount of materials required," he said, noting industries could donate steel and gravel instead of cash.

The plan is to surround the area of heaviest coal tar contamination, roughly 7.5 hectares beside U.S. Steel Canada's Hamilton Works, with a large wall. Sediment would be dredged from elsewhere in the harbour, dumped into the structure and capped with clean fill.

One-third of the surface would be planted to encourage wildlife use, and Cheriene Vieira from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment said the remaining two-thirds would be asphalted for use as a docking and container facility.

Federal and provincial governments have already committed $30 million each, leaving the team to scrounge up the last $30 million.

The HPA has agreed to kick in $7 million, but the economic crisis and Hamilton's budget squeeze have some questioning the chances of securing the remaining $23 million.

Brent Kinnaird of the HPA said it was confident despite the market downturn. "We're just waiting to see who else will be able to come to the table."

Construction is slated to start in April 2010.

[realcity]

Originally Posted by Dundasguy

The St. Lawrence is too narrow and too shallow to accomodate today's super sized container ships.

Is that true up river of Montreal? or the entire seaway at least to Hamilton? Montreal is a container port -- fairly important one -- does Montreal not get supersized ships?

I'm not concerned with the Welland Canal if Hamilton is a container port the ships won't need the canal.

[realcity]

Researched it

Only a portion of the seaway can accommodate "Panamax" sized container ships. That is, maximum size for Panama Canal. The more modern super-tankers/containers can't even fit in the Panama Canal. Which is why Long Beach CA is so busy.

A major investment is being considered to make the locks/river in the portion from Montreal to Lake Ontario larger, which then Hamilton could become a container port. Or to use "feeder ships".

Interesting to note: 10,000 containers fall into the ocean every year.
Container shipping is more costly then other means (fuel being the largest expense) but savings are more then made up in handling costs. I assume there is a tipping point when fuel costs rise enough to the point when container shipping no longer makes sense.

[flar]

^^We would have to enlarge Burlington Canal under the skyway to allow those huge ships to come into the harbour.

[realcity]

We... that means the Seaway. Not Hamilton, but yes if the seaway is going to be enlarged that would mean the Burlington canal. That's likely the least expensive element compared to widening/deepening the seaway upstream of Montreal.

[SteelTown]

Will steel slump hurt reef cleanup?

March 18, 2009
Eric McGuinness
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/532106

U.S. Steel Canada says it will honour an obligation made by Stelco to supply steel for the cleanup of toxic coal tar around Randle Reef in Hamilton Harbour.

But the impending, indefinite shutdown of both the Hamilton and Lake Erie plants raises a question about whether the company will be making steel in Canada in time for the planned start of construction next year.

Agencies involved in the harbour restoration have not revealed that the former Stelco made a commitment before being acquired by U.S. Steel. They continue to say they only hope for a cash or in-kind contribution from the new owner.

The promise is revealed in a February 2008 U.S. Steel filing to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

It says: "The Canadian and Ontario governments have each made commitments for the environmental remediation of Randall (sic) Reef in Hamilton Harbour. Stelco had committed to supply steel necessary for this project. USSC (United States Steel Canada) has inherited this commitment and has accrued a liability equal to the estimated cost of supplying such steel.

"It is possible that additional commitments may be sought or imposed on USSC, but the nature and extent thereof cannot be estimated at this time."

Environment Canada and the Ontario Environment Ministry have each pledged $30 million to the $90-million plan to build a double-walled steel structure around the most heavily contaminated sediment, then to dredge up less-toxic mud and put it inside the walls before adding a cap of clean fill. Part of the resulting peninsula would be landscaped, part would become a Hamilton Port Authority pier.

The authority hired former federal Liberal cabinet minister Tony Valeri last year to find the $30-million local share.

Brent Kinnaird, the authority's market development manager, would not comment on how much has been raised or on the commitment by Stelco.

Trevor Harris, speaking for U.S. Steel Canada, said the company realizes the importance of the cleanup and the SEC filing speaks for itself in terms of the company's obligation. Beyond that, he said: "We intend to be a good neighbour in Hamilton and do all we can to help this community thrive for a long time to come. Over the course of the last year and a half, we have demonstrated that environmental stewardship is a core principle of our business."

Environment Canada's Tracy Lacroix-Wilson sent an e-mail saying U.S. Steel had "indicated a willingness" to address the coal-tar issue and, "We have received no indication that recently announced changes to the operation of the U.S. Steel plant in Hamilton in any way alter that position.

"We will be following up with all parties engaged in the Randle Reef project over the coming months to confirm funding and participation through development of formal agreements.

"We anticipate that U.S. Steel will join the governments of Canada and Ontario, the City of Hamilton, the Hamilton Port Authority and potentially other parties in confirming their contributions to the project at that time."

Jennifer Hall, on behalf of the Environment Ministry, said: "U.S. Steel recognizes the need to contribute to the project and we are very encouraged with recent discussions about their commitment to help fund Randle Reef with in-kind steel contribution.

"The shutdown has had no impact on these discussions and we remain very positive that an agreement will be reached."

[SteelTown]

Randle cleanup stuck in the mud
Design changes, lack of local funding blamed

November 23, 2009
Eric McGuinness
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/678119

Construction design changes and a lack of local funding are being blamed for a big delay in the $90-million cleanup of toxic tar on Randle Reef in Hamilton Harbour.

A timetable presented at this time last year said the environmental assessment would be complete and tenders called by August 2009, with construction starting in spring 2010.

Now, however, Environment Canada says it won’t have the assessment and final design done until early spring.

It’s a significant issue because the underwater reef holds Canada’s second-largest deposit of coal tar after the Sydney Tar Ponds in Nova Scotia. Scientists say it’s too polluted for any life to survive.

Until the contaminated sediment is removed or contained, the harbour cannot be removed from the International Joint Commission’s list of Great Lakes areas of concern, a move York University researchers say would be worth $1 billion to the city.

Delay jeopardizes the city’s goal of having the harbour delisted by 2015.

JIm Hudson, executive director of the Bay Area Restoration Council (BARC), said: “I’ve asked both federal and provincial people what’s going on, but had no answer yet. I’ve asked if it isn’t time for citizens’ groups to start pushing and been told that’s premature.”

East Hamilton Councillor Sam Merulla believes the lack of progress is due to “a power struggle between all stakeholders on who will be the lead agency.”

He says the Hamilton Port Authority, which was to contribute $7 million and oversee construction, is concerned about the magnitude of the work and possible cost overruns.

Marilyn Baxter, the port authority’s environmental manager, and John Hall, co-ordinator of the Hamilton Harbour Remedial Action Plan, both referred questions to Environment Canada project manager Roger Santiago.

Tracy Lacroix-Wilson, an Environment Canada media relations adviser, said she could not arrange an interview with Santiago and instead sent an e-mail saying it’s taken longer than expected “to develop the necessary agreements among the federal, provincial and local governments and other stakeholders, secure local funding and complete the engineering design and environmental assessment.”

Wally Rozenberg of the Ontario Environment Ministry echoed that statement, saying every effort is being made “to keep moving this thing forward,” but it’s a complex project involving many partners.

Ottawa and Queen’s Park have each pledged $30 million. The port authority hired former federal Liberal Cabinet minister Tony Valeri to help raise the remaining $30 million, but won’t comment on results. U.S. Steel Canada has said in U.S. financial reports that it inherited a commitment to contribute an undisclosed amount when it bought Hamilton steelmaker Stelco.

Mark Sproule-Jones, McMaster University professor emeritus in political science and former BARC chair, said he doubts the city can afford to put much money toward the project, but he’s less concerned about delay than some other people because he disagrees with the plan to wall off contaminated bay-bottom mud rather than removing and cleaning it.

The plan outlined last year would create a steel-walled containment facility around the most polluted 7.5 hectares west of U.S. Steel’s Hamilton Works at the foot of Sherman Avenue. Less-contaminated sediment would be dredged up and put inside, then capped with clean fill to create a cargo pier with a landscaped area facing the water.

[SteelTown]

Effort to cap toxic stew awaits only city funding

February 16, 2010
Eric McGuinness
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/722662

Hamilton has yet to come up with its one-third share of the Randle Reef cleanup cost more than two years after the federal and provincial governments pledged a total of $60 million.

The environmental assessment is unfinished, the Hamilton Port Authority is refusing to manage the project and local officials are begging Public Works Canada to take over.

All the while, a toxic stew of coal tar, metals and industrial chemicals on the floor of Hamilton Harbour continues to spread and disperse.

Randle Reef has been called a spill in slow motion.

Lynda Lukasik, executive director of Environment Hamilton, says, "Now we have a cleanup in slow motion."

The plan is to build a steel wall around the most contaminated sediment beside U.S. Steel Canada's plant, then add material dredged from other areas and cap the structure to create two piers for the port authority.

When the McGuinty government announced its $30-million pledge 30 months ago this week, it said work could start in 2008. No one can now say when it will begin.

The cost has risen to $105 million from $90 million and it seems certain Hamilton has lost its chance to celebrate the harbour cleanup in 2015, when it welcomes thousands of visitors to the Pan Am Games.

Leaders of the Bay Area Restoration Council (BARC) have lost patience. They say it's time for citizens to put pressure on government agencies to get on with the job.

BARC chairperson Debra McBride issued a statement saying her organization, once buoyed by promises of $60 million in 2007, is very disappointed at the lack of action.

"We were led to believe that the remaining one-third of the cost, the local portion, would be confirmed in short order. Yet, to date, not one cent of local funding has been publicly announced.

"As a result of this delay, the costs have risen to $105 million and our target of delisting our harbour by 2015 as an area of concern, as defined by the International Joint Commission, has been compromised.

"We encourage the mayor and the Hamilton Port Authority to resolve this matter as soon as possible."

Bill Bardswick, regional director of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, issued a statement confirming, "efforts have been unsuccessful to date to secure the one-third local commitment, which is $35 million."

But as a result of questions asked by The Spectator, port authority president Bruce Wood revealed it has spent more than $1 million on continuing design work and has agreed to ante up $6 million toward the construction cost.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger insists the main issue isn't money, but the need to replace the authority as construction manager.

"The biggest speed bump is who is going to be project leader," he said. Sources suggest new hands at the helm of the authority are worried about being responsible for possible cost overruns.

Eisenberger said the authority "doesn't have the manpower or expertise," so it makes sense to turn to Public Works Canada, which is cleaning up the Sydney Tar Ponds in Nova Scotia, the only worse case of coal tar pollution in Canada.

"We're close to finalizing that, and because it's going to be a nine-, 10- or 14-year project, the funding can still be sorted out. I can tell you the lion's share is in place and we are looking to Halton and Burlington to be partners."

David Christopherson, NDP MP for Hamilton Centre, said he hadn't heard about the port authority dropping its construction role and wondered why it hadn't said something earlier.

"What's heartbreaking, though, is that this is the easiest part. The hard part was getting money from the senior levels of government, getting the players lined up.

"I even let the Conservatives use me as one of their props for the announcement in 2007."

City MPs and MPPs met with the mayor late last week. Christopherson later said the five MPs had agreed to sign a letter asking Public Works Canada to step in as soon as possible.

[SteelTown]

'Solid leadership' sought
Two MPs ask feds for help with Randle Reef cleanup

February 27, 2010
Eric McGuinness
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/729409

Hamilton's two Conservative Members of Parliament are asking federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice to find new leadership for the cleanup of toxic coal-tar-contaminated sediment on Randle Reef.

The Hamilton Port Authority has backed out of managing the project, now estimated to cost $105 million, and Mayor Fred Eisenberger has said efforts are focused on convincing Public Works Canada to take over.

It's a significant issue because it's Canada's second-worst case of coal tar pollution and must be fixed before Hamilton Harbour can be removed from a list of toxic hot spots on the Great Lakes.

David Sweet, MP for the riding of Ancaster Dundas Flamborough Aldershot, told The Spectator this week that he and Niagara West-Glanbrook MP Dean Allison have written Prentice, whose department is conducting an environmental assessment of the remediation plan.

Sweet said, "We have asked that he (Prentice) look into it personally and try and re-establish leadership in the project now that the port authority is not going to do it."

He said he and Allison chose not to identify a department, such as Public Works, but instead just to say to the minister whose department pledged $30 million for the work three years ago, "Let's establish some leadership, solid leadership."

Frederic Baril, an aide to Prentice, confirmed that the letter was received Tuesday and said, "We are working on a response, however, you understand that I won't speculate on the content of this response before we reply to the MPs."

Jim Hudson, executive director of the Bay Area Restoration Council (BARC), applauded the MPs for trying to get the stalled project moving.

BARC president Debra McBride recently issued a statement saying the organization was disappointed by the lack of progress. She called on the mayor and port authority to sort out the management issue and the matter of finding $30 million or more to match contributions promised by the federal and provincial governments.

She complained that not one cent of the local share had been publicly announced.

The port authority has since said it would put up $6 million, and Eisenberger said the city put $2 million in its capital budget last year and will add $3 million this year. Finance staff say a portion will come from provincial infrastructure grants rather than city ratepayers. The rest will be borrowed.

The proposed cleanup involves building a steel-walled containment facility around the heaviest coal tar deposits, then dredging less-contaminated sediment and adding it to the facility, topping it with clean fill and creating two piers for the port authority.

[thistleclub]

Toxic cleanup bill keeps rising
City asked for another $3 million

Eric McGuinness
The Hamilton Spectator
(Apr 19, 2010)

Hamilton city council is being asked to put up $3 million more toward the cleanup of Randle Reef -- bringing its contribution to $8 million -- but only if Burlington and Halton Region together ante up $4 million.

Staff say the extra is needed to get to the $30-million minimum local share demanded by the federal and provincial governments, which promised $30 million each when the projected total cost of the harbour project was $90 million.

Jim Harnum, the city's senior director of environment and sustainable infrastructure, says the estimated cost is now up to $105 million and the two senior levels of government are being asked to make up the difference, but they insist community sources still raise at least $30 million.

Randle Reef is a shallow area near U.S. Steel's Hamilton Works, heavily contaminated with toxic coal tar. The cleanup plan involves building a containment structure around the worst sediment, then adding less-contaminated mud from other areas of the harbour and capping it to create a shipping pier.

The work must be done to stop the contamination from spreading and to help get the harbour off the International Joint Commission's list of Great Lakes toxic hot spots.

In a report to go to city council's public works committee today, Harnum says commitments so far include the city's $5 million, $6 million from the Hamilton Port Authority and $7 million from U.S. Steel, for a total of $18 million

The U. S. Steel money would fulfil a commitment made by Stelco Inc. before being bought by the American company. The size of its pledge has not previously been disclosed.

City officials are using a bookkeeping tactic to inflate the local share to $23 million.

They say steel piling that would have cost $12 million at peak prices can now be bought for about $7 million.

They count the $5-million saving as part of the local commitment. With $3 million more from Hamilton and $4 million from Halton, the total comes to $30 million.

Harnum proposes the city takes its extra $3 million from the water and sewer rate budget rather than from property tax revenue.

He said federal and provincial officials are not asking Hamilton to increase its share.

"They said to us, 'You must raise at least the $30 million to which you committed. We can work with that.'"

He said: "The key is to get it going before our share rises to $38 million or $40 million. We have another 10 years to raise funds while the work goes on, but let's get started."

Harnum also said he expects Environment Canada to fill a leadership vacuum created when the port authority backed out.

Hamilton's two Conservative MPs wrote Environment Minister Jim Prentice earlier this year asking the federal government to step in, and Harnum says Environment Canada staff are now asking to be put in charge.

[SteelTown]

Feds to review Randle Reef plan

HAMILTON SPECTATOR
http://www.thespec.com/news/article/...ndle-reef-plan

The Hamilton Port Authority has submitted the Randle Reef containment design to the federal government for approval, sparking optimism the project to enclose toxic sediment in the harbour will finally go forward.

“Thank God,” said Jim Hudson, executive director of the Bay Area Restoration Council (BARC). “We’re going forward on a project selected to be the best solution that we can afford.”

Randle Reef is a shallow area near U.S. Steel’s Hamilton Works, heavily contaminated with coal tar. The cleanup plan involves building a containment structure around the worst sediment, then adding less-contaminated mud from other areas of the harbour and capping it to create a shipping pier.

The work must be done to stop the contamination from spreading and to help get the harbour off the International Joint Commission’s list of Great Lakes toxic hot spots.

The Port Authority placed an ad last week giving public notice of an application under the Navigable Waters Protection Act to the Minister of Transport. The application, which includes the site and engineering plans for the structure, can be viewed at the No. 62 land registry office of Wentworth. The public has 30 days to comment.

But a critical piece of the plan is still missing -- a financial commitment from the city to match federal and provincial contributions. There is federal and provincial money on the table -- $30 million each for Randle Reef. Delays over the past three years have pushed the $90 million project cost to about $150 million.

Burlington and Halton Region have been asked to contribute $4 million each. The port authority has committed $6 million and U.S. Steel has promised $7 million.

[thistleclub]

More from the Spec.

March 8, 2011
Tide turns on capping Randle Reef cleanup
Paul Morse: "The quest to clean up Hamilton Harbour's Randle Reef, the most toxic hot spot in Canada's Great Lakes, is back into turmoil. First, Hamilton's new mayor Bob Bratina says he doesn't support the current Hamilton Port Authority plan of capping and containing the shoal of accumulated coal tar. Secondly, Burlington bureaucrats have recommended that city turn down a request for $2.3 million toward the cost of the remediation project. Finally, the federal government is strongly hinting the project, now pegged to cost $105 million, may go over budget. On Monday, Bratina said he wants the toxic reef removed altogether rather than just capped and contained.... Bratina said he is in favour of spending the Hamilton money on the cleanup, but that the current plan is too risky in the event of an earthquake or a ship running into the new pier and breaking open the containment. 'Putting a box on it sounds like a Monty Python hammer hitting someone in the head,' he said."

March 9, 2011
Randle Reef letdown again
Howard Elliott: "...containment is the option the stakeholders agreed upon, in part because safe removal is so much more expensive. In the absence of a strong scientific case for removal, it’s hard to endorse a change in course at this point, which would probably result in another indefinite delay. Burlington city staff’s reluctance is less troublesome. Regardless of who has historic responsibility for the problem, our cities share the harbour, and it’s in everyone’s interest to deal with this blight. So let Hamilton and Burlington city councils deliberate their respective questions, and make quick decisions based on the best information available. Please, get on with the job."

March 9, 2011
Bratina shoots from the lip — again
Andrew Dreschel: "It’s time Bob Bratina realized he’s not a radio guy anymore where doodling fancies and spitball ideas conveniently disappear into the ether. He’s the mayor of Hamilton. His words count. They become part of the public record and they can have positive and negative ripple effects on policies, perceptions and partner relationships. In that context, Bratina’s comments against the agreed-upon cap-and-contain cleanup strategy for Randle Reef can only muddy the waters around the multimillion dollar project and embarrass Hamilton in the eyes of its funding partners."

~

Multi-stakeholder debate over RR remediation solutions began in 1992, and as Dreschel points out, the feds have actively been on board since 1995. Those involved reached an imperfect consensus in 2007, largely because of the oppressive cost of wholesale removal, treatment and disposal (estimated at $300m in 2007), which would have been more palatable for environmentalists but tri-level political kryptonite compared to the then-$30m commitment for a cap-in-place plan. And the City couldn't even bring itself to kick in $30m.

[realcity]

Randle Reef funding has been there for years. The entire time Fred was the mayor he did not ever try to put a time frame or plan together to address it. And he was also the Port Authority chief before he was mayor

[SteelTown]

Halton’s $2 million for Randle Reef cleanup comes with strings

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/ar...s-with-strings

OAKVILLE Halton’s administration and finance committee voted unanimously Wednesday to contribute $2 million over 10 years to the Randle Reef cleanup, reaffirming the region’s commitment in the project.

Yet, like Burlington’s pledge, the cash will come with conditions.

According to a staff report, the region’s commitment is contingent on Ottawa and Queen’s Park covering at least two-thirds of the cost of the approximately $105-million project, U.S. Steel kicking in the $12 million to $14 million attributed to it in the original funding model, and a sharing of profits from a new shipping dock that’s to be built alongside U.S. Steel’s existing dock at Pier 16.

Halton will also take no responsibility for cost overruns and will not accept any liabilities during construction.

On Monday night, Burlington city council approved a similar $2.3-million commitment that depends on the federal government taking the lead on the project, Halton making a comparable contribution and the city receiving a share of the profits from the proposed pier.

Halton will vote on its own proposal at a regional council meeting next Wednesday.

Jim Hudson, executive director of the Bay Area Restoration Council, said he was “thrilled” with the committee’s support.

He said the region should invest in the cleanup because it benefits economically from residents who commute to work in Hamilton, yet live and spend their money in Halton. He also cautioned the committee about possible negative long-term consequences if the region and other key stakeholders aren’t on board.

“Where you don’t know the impact of exposure to something, you take the safe option,” he said. “You don’t continue to expose people to it for a couple of decades and then find out later it may or may not have been a good decision.”

Burlington councillor Paul Sharman suggested the region’s commitment would help propel the “nickel and diming” upper levels of government to make good on their funding promises and help get the cleanup under way.

“We have to provide strong support to this project to get it moving, to get it done,” he said.

So far, the federal government and province have each committed $30 million to THE CLEANUP, WHILE LOCAL PARTNERS HAVE AGREED TO CHIP IN ANOTHER $37.7 MILLION — $16 million from U.S. Steel (formerly Stelco), $10.3 million from the Hamilton Port Authority, $9.1 million from the City of Hamilton and $2.3 million from the City of Burlington.

The $2 million from Halton would be distributed evenly over 10 years, starting in 2012.

[thistleclub]

Still in the spotlight, if not the to-do list.

Lake Ontario’s Dirtiest Spot [Antonia Zerbisias, Toronto Star, July 8, 2011]

There are many ways to define dirty when it comes to water pollution. Is the dirtiest part of Lake Ontario where the most sewage flows? The most agricultural runoff? The most industrial waste? Or where the yuckiest accumulation of rotting algae clogs the shores?

We asked Lake Ontario Waterkeeper’s president, Mark Mattson.

He fingered Hamilton Harbour, specifically an inlet west of the industrial section near Evans McKeil Way. Hamilton Harbour is one of the International Joint Commission’s six “areas of concern” around the lake — areas that have been “severely degraded.”

“Inhaling vapours from the sediment in that area can cause numbness and burning in the mouth/nose,” Mattson says. “Contact with bare hands can cause rashes and burns.”

[SteelTown]

From Collins

Costs for Randle Reef have increased since original estimates were developed; City needs addtnl funding commitment from Prov & Feds.

[thistleclub]

Senior government should allow an increase to cost-sharing at 2012 levels and no further.

Allowing Hamilton endless extensions only fosters the kind of intransigence the city has been pushing since the provincial and federal funding commitments four and a half years ago. Even Halton can come up with a funding commitment, albeit comparatively small.

"Work on defining the 'State of the Harbour' was first initiated in 1985, a 'Remendial Action Plan' followed in 1992, and delisting is anticipated in 2015."

Harbour remediation has been on the agenda for at least 20 years and Hamilton still can't seem to get its act together. Inaction on RR is an indictment of this city's leadership. Let council lie in the bed it has made for itself.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Randle Reef team seeks $23 million

November 19, 2008
Jackson Hayes
The Hamilton Spectator

The team behind the Randle Reef cleanup project is still looking for $23million, but remains confident it will be able to bury the toxic sediment by 2019....

Federal and provincial governments have already committed $30 million each, leaving the team to scrounge up the last $30 million.

The HPA has agreed to kick in $7 million, but the economic crisis and Hamilton's budget squeeze have some questioning the chances of securing the remaining $23 million.

Brent Kinnaird of the HPA said it was confident despite the market downturn. "We're just waiting to see who else will be able to come to the table."

Construction is slated to start in April 2010.

Closing on five years since two-thirds of the project cost had been committed, the City is still digging in the couch cushions for loose change. Council has now approved $14 million toward remediation -- which, thanks to escalating project costs, represents 10% of the estimated total cost of the project. Throw in the HPA's existing $7 million commitment and that leaves Hamilton with a shortfall of roughly $26 million. We've hit the neighbours up for $2 million, and if that materializes we're down to a $24 million gap, basically where we were four years ago. If only this had been a lengthy and coordinated process with a clear end goal, the city might have been able to budget for this expense.

[thistleclub]

City Wants Help With Reef Cleanup Costs (Matthew Van Dongen, Hamilton Spectator, Aug 13, 2012)

Hamilton councillors have increased the city’s contribution to the Randle Reef cleanup to $14 million while challenging other project partners to ante up as well.

A new city report estimates the total cost of containing decades of industrial pollution in Hamilton Harbour at close to $140 million. Last year, the project was still pegged at around $105 million.

The new estimate leaves government and private partners short about $46 million to cover the elaborate plan to trap about 630,000 cubic metres of coal tar in a new shipping pier. The city and Hamilton Port Authority would probably be responsible for another $11 million, said the report.

Councillors pre-empted a planned staff report on financial options Monday and instead voted to immediately add another $6 million to the city’s existing $8 million commitment.

“We’re in,” said Councillor Brian McHattie. “Hopefully that will put some pressure on other levels of government and the port authority to put up their share as well … This has been a very long road.”

The city has been planning some sort of coal tar cleanup in the harbour for two decades, with estimated costs gradually climbing from $15 million in the 1990s to $140 million today.

John Hall, the co-ordinator of the harbour remedial action plan, called the reef one of the biggest impediments to knocking Hamilton off the International Joint Commission’s list of worst-polluted Great Lakes sites.

“Today is a big day for the harbour,” he said, referring to the reef report and a new plan to improve processes at the Woodward Avenue sewage treatment plant. Hall suggested if project funding is secured soon, Hamilton could begin the process of “delisting” the harbour as an area of concern in 2020.

Councillor Chad Collins, who moved the motion to commit the cash, called the harbour cleanup “the greatest environmental challenge this city has faced in the last 100 years.”

Collins asked staff to talk with the port authority and report back to council in the hopes of securing the local funding for the project as soon as possible. The staff report suggests asking the port authority for additional in-kind service worth $5 million on top of the agency’s existing $9 million commitment.

Port Authority president Bruce Wood told the Spectator last week he wouldn’t comment on the agency’s contribution, referring all questions to Environment Canada.

Both the provincial Ministry of Environment and Environment Canada are seeking budget approval to bump up their existing $35 million contributions, according to the staff report. Environment Minister Peter Kent said last year the government would likely take on additional costs in the project, which is now headed by federal public works and Environment Canada officials.

Councillor Lloyd Ferguson said he supported council’s decision, but asked staff why the project cost has jumped almost 45 per cent over five years. The staff report blamed inflation and more accurate engineering details for the rising cost.

But city manager Chris Murray added the project estimate contains “a fair bit for contingencies” because of the large amount of in-water work needed to encase the toxic reef in steel.

The latest report calls for project financing to be finalized this year and construction completed by 2022.