Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Sacramento
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-21-2007, 02:13 AM
 
3 posts, read 44,999 times
Reputation: 15

Advertisements

What part is the area prone to flooding? Plumas Lake only? I am confused.Plumas is growing fast like Elk Grove 5-10 years ago.. New houses are inexpensive- but not at the expensive of a flood. The Sac Bee article March 2007 , the natives to Sacramento is saying STAY AWAY FROM PLUMAS LAKE-FLOOD AREA 1986, and 1989 great flood took place.

Was plumas an area for farming?
so is it yuba, marysville also flood prone I am so confused?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2007, 11:57 PM
 
433 posts, read 2,355,993 times
Reputation: 325
Marysville is probably somewhat more flood prone than Yuba City. I don't know anything about Plumas Lake. Never heard of it.

When you search for homes in the Valley, always check it out. Do a search on the northern California Floods of 83 or the floods of 95 or the floods of 97/98. Look for levees. And look to see if your levee is better than the other guys! Check a topo map and find (and avoid) the basins or areas with few levees between you and the Sacramento or Feather Rivers.

Most of the new development in the areas you are considering were agricultural lands and the levee systems are/were by and large marginal. I don't trust the local politics in those small towns (or even Sacramento) for residential construction approval because $$$ always seems to get in the way of the clear thinking and long term safety.

There is a reason homes cost more in the highly protected (or higher elevation) areas around the Valley.

The Sacramento Valley is a nice place to live. However, when things get crazy and the big reservoirs (Shasta, Oroville etc.) fill up, the situation can quickly turn grave. I believe all of Marysville and Yuba City (and many other towns) had to be evacuated back in 97/98. The people had to head for the hills and run for their lives. The levees could have gone at any moment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2007, 07:45 PM
 
6 posts, read 55,275 times
Reputation: 17
Yes, the levee's here are not the best, but neither are most of the ones in Sac and Elk grove. Plumas Lake is named after what it used to be... a lake bottom. The worst spots to be flooded were olivehurst, linda, and plumas lake. But it was luck of what levee would blow first. The least likely place to flood in the yuba.sutter area is north west yuba city, town of sutter, or the yuba county foothills.
Def. stay away from plumas LAKE and shanghi bend (yuba city).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2007, 12:05 PM
 
Location: The mountians of Northern California.
1,354 posts, read 6,376,567 times
Reputation: 1343
If you can find out where the levee breaks in 1995 happened, you might find what you are looking for. I am not sure how the levees are now, hopefully they have been improved. My husbands family were evacuated in 1995 when the levees broke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2007, 08:15 AM
 
1 posts, read 39,272 times
Reputation: 19
Default 200-year flood protection plan

As the risk of flooding to existing development in South Yuba County became more and more apparent, the Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA) was created. In May 2004 the County of Yuba and Reclamation District 784 through a joint powers agency agreement created TRLIA to finance and construct levee improvements surrounding the South Yuba County Area. Four work phases have been identified with the goal of achieving 200-year flood protection. The first construction work was initiated in September 2004 and final phase is scheduled to complete by October 2008. The cost to complete the four phases is estimated to be $230 million and will be funded by local development fees and State Proposition 13 funding.

To date, more than $130 million has been invested to improve the levees along the Yuba River (site of the 1986 flood) the Western Pacific Interceptor Canal (parallels Highway 99 from Plumas Lake to Yuba City) and the Bear River. In the case of the Bear River, a totally new levee was constructed approximately a quarter mile removed from the site of the old levee to provide a wider flood way for the river. The work was managed by the Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA), a joint powers agency consisting of the Reclamation District 784 (RD 784) and Yuba County.

The work certified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers includes three of four planned phases of work planned by TRLIA. Yet to be completed are improvements to the levee along the Feather River. Work on the Feather River levee is scheduled to start later this summer and be completed by the end of 2008. Once the work to the Feather River levee is completed, the 30,000 existing residents of south Yuba County will have a greater than 200-year level of protection (FEMA certifies to a 100-year criteria, but the engineers designed all of the improvements to a minimum 200-year protection level).

See also www.trlia.com and http://www.plumaslakeliving.com/levee.htm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2008, 11:43 AM
 
7 posts, read 69,401 times
Reputation: 11
the reason it flooded back then was because sacramento was toping off and on was going flood(levee giving way) so the they broke the levee up north on perpose to relive the pressure on the levee causing it to flood.Back then the population there compared to sacramento was far more less.
think about it so they saved sacramento from flooding and kept it a secret or noone knew who was handeling it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2008, 10:09 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, California
1,948 posts, read 6,460,927 times
Reputation: 2294
DO NOT BUY HOUSING in THE PLUMAS LAKE AREA, in 1997 the whole area was under 10 - 15 maybe 20 feet of water in some areas, when the levee broke, the whole area is a flood plain.

one couple stood on the roof of their car all night until rescued the next morning.

very poor choice to buy a home, if the levee breaks again, it's guranteed to flood in those areas, the area is all old farmland, the homes are all on low ground.

Last edited by mr bolo; 11-15-2008 at 10:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 04:23 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, California
1,948 posts, read 6,460,927 times
Reputation: 2294
a few photos from 97 flood
Attached Thumbnails
Yuba City/Marysville/Plumas Lake Area- Are  They All Flood Prone?-dog_and_owner_bare_brunt_of_flood.jpg   Yuba City/Marysville/Plumas Lake Area- Are  They All Flood Prone?-cafigure2.jpg   Yuba City/Marysville/Plumas Lake Area- Are  They All Flood Prone?-flood-16.jpg   Yuba City/Marysville/Plumas Lake Area- Are  They All Flood Prone?-flood.jpg  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 05:17 PM
 
67 posts, read 289,632 times
Reputation: 33
I know the houses look like a great deal. But I wouldn't buy a house anywhere near Marysville, Linda, etc. And not because of the risk of water, but because it is an area with a HUGE drug/meth problem, and crime. Do a Megan's Law search just for kicks. You won't believe how many sex offenders are in such a small town.
I was a social worker there, and it isn't pretty. Lots of poverty and crime very near the nice looking "Plumas Lake" area... Drive around and look for yourself, before you buy. I don't know about the schools in Plumas, but I would never put my kid in the system in Marysville. Ever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 05:35 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, California
1,948 posts, read 6,460,927 times
Reputation: 2294
I agree, the people that live near that area are pure scum bags, trailor trash, meth heads, gangs, etc, you cant get any lower and scummier, extreme poverty nearby, theft, burglary, property crime is also very high.

I use to know a guy that lived there and his house was burglarized numerous times, they even stole his dog.



you have been warned!

it's better to pay more and live somewhere else, unless you want to become a prisonor in your own home, you cant stay home and guard your house 24 / 7

Last edited by mr bolo; 11-16-2008 at 05:49 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Sacramento
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top