SAFCA: floods: Rio Linda: correspondence Feb 01 -

SAFCA in the RIO LINDA ELVERTA area
CORRESPONDENCE
FEBRUARY 2001 - APRIL 2001

Some of this correspondence was also published in the
Rio Linda Elverta News.
Call 916 991-3000 to subscribe.

Jump to correspondence starting May 2001

INDEX OF THIS PAGE:

click here for correspondence from the Rio Linda Elverta email list

OTHER LINKS

Erwin Hayer's correspondence with SAFCA and the State Reclamation Board: Reference

compiled by Jay O'Brien

Correspondence posted on the Rio Linda Elverta Mailing List.
Note: The mailing list is restricted to people who work or live in Rio Linda Elverta.
The authors of this correspondence have granted me permission to repeat it here.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:02:52 PST
From: raya6@juno.com
To: hodgkinsb@SacCounty.net
CC: rogerd@SacCounty.net, illac@SacCounty.net, murielj@SacCounty.net,nielloroger@SacCounty.net, donn@SacCounty.net, raya6@juno.com,RQuack4131@aol.com, eeh625@hotmail.com, riolinda@vrx.net

February 1, 2001
To: SAFCA BOARD OF DIRECTORS ;
cc: The State of California Reclamation Board

From: Ray Antonelli
1240 E Street
Rio Linda, Ca
Subject: Robla Creek Levee Project

SAFCA Board;

I attended the SAFCA Board meeting January 18, 2001 about the proposed project on the Lower Dry Creek and Robla Creek levee improvements and I would like to go on record that I strongly oppose the continuation of this project along with the 506 residents who had signed petitions that was turned into you.

Your Staff has recommended that you adopt a combination of Option 2 which includes raising the Robla Creek south levee to an elevation of 44.4 feet and Option C, which provides structural protection to the airport, the Western Acres and Bell Aqua subdivisions and the Bell Aqua water ski lakes..

The combination of these 2 Options puts those of us living east of Dry Creek Road in jeopardy of being flooded not only by high waters rising in the creeks but by accumulated local run off during extended rainfall downpours .. The raising of Dry Creek Road from Ascot to E Street to make it an all weather road and the berm that is proposed on the east side of said road will amount to a levee to the east of my property at 1240 E Street.. Over the years we have watched the water getting closer to us and those who live behind me on C Street and with this new "levee" the amount of water that will be held back will be over twice as much as we have experienced before..

In 1986 and 1995 the water behind and to the west of our property did not threaten to inundate our house which was built to county elevation specs of 45.0 feet with the rest of our land being closer to 43.1... Since the south levee has been built waters in 1997, 98, 99, and 2000 have come within a few inches in height from entering our garage without any major flood problems in the area.. I attribute this to the water backed up from the East Levee Main Drain project that you already have in place and expect to be worse with Option C.. The proposed "Berm" or "Levee" or what ever you want to call it that is to be built on the west and south side of the airport , around the Bell Aqua lakes ;and properties puts us yet again at a higher potential of increased waters do to the fact of Dry Creek itself is prone to flooding the west side of the airport now will have a greater chance to do an end-around at the south end of the runway and join with the waters of Robla Creek backing up on the residents east of Dry Creek Road..

The Storm Drain from the subdivisions of Bell Aqua ;and Western Acres that will empty into Robla Creek south of the apartment complex again adds more water to the "Dry Creek Road East Lake" that we currently are living in...

I have attended the SAFCA meetings in 1998 and the open houses in 2000 and in all these gatherings I have never seen an Option to leave things alone-- don’t fix it if it isn’t broke.... The 2 open houses I attended had SAFCA represented by 4 or 5 experts in their field of expertise but without the complete explanation to any questions that you may pose.. During the CPAC meeting of January 9, 2001 Mr. Butch Hodgkins was asked a question to the effect of " if the first levee had not been built would we need the second one??" His answer was"NO"..... The statements made by SAFCA are to the effect that "We need to protect North Sacramento and North Natomas and it is really unfortunate that in the process a few homes in the sparsely populated Rio Linda Area will be inundated with water.." The real upsetting part of this whole thing is I LIVE in one of those houses your project intends to inundate... North Sacramento was protected from the American River with flood gates which are still in place at the south end of town and protected from the Sacramento River as we were by the East Levee Drainage Cannel... Gardenland or "North Natomas" after the politicians got hold of it was 20 feet lower than us and used for crops and extra emergency flood plain water storage.. It is my belief that water still runs down hill and will seek its own level.. We the people of Rio Linda are tired of being used as a dumping ground for water , household trash , cars , and anything unwanted ... We don’t need your flood waters and I for one will guarantee that you will get the FIRST phone call from me when my house starts to flood and the SECOND from my attorney because if flooding occurs you are the people that caused it..

Thank you
Ray Antonelli

Ray & Neata Antonelli
1240 E Street
Rio Linda, Ca 95673
cc: file

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Letter to SAFCA Feb 2 2001
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 16:28:11 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net,
kathy@argonautconsulting.com
CC: julie.blazona@asm.ca.gov

Hello
The following letter mailed to SAFCA on Feb 2 2001.
Erwin

February 2, 2001
SAFCA Board of Directors
1007 Seventh Street, Fifth Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814

SAFCA Board Members

The Choke point created downstream of Rio Linda Blvd by the north and south levee on the Dry Creek and Robla Creek floodplain by SAFCA construction is questionable. The levees removed 800 feet from the width of floodplain and SAFCA data shows this has raised the floodwater at this point.

Also, the new fences placed across the flood plain will be a restriction to floodwater flow.

The SAFCA floodwater elevation at Elkhorn Blvd of the Dry Creek south stream is not accurate. Sacramento County ALERT System and Water Resources Department data indicates record floodwater elevations were set on Jan 10 1995 at all sensors upstream and at a location 3300 feet down stream.

A home on Cherry Lane had over a 1-foot increase of floodwater in 1995 above 1986.

If Magpie Creek is approved for enlargement by another project later on, more than 2 ½ times the floodwater will be flowing from Magpie into the lower Rio Linda Area for a 100-year storm.

I am against the raising of the Robla South Levee above it present elevation. SAFCA Staff originally said that the levee would not create additional upstream flooding. SAFCA finally admitted that the levee would increase flooding upstream and The Reclamation Board placed some 55 general and special conditions on the project.

SAFCA has provided flood insurance for many homes and business’s in the affected area to meet the requirements of special condition 53.

Raising this levee to give North Sacramento 400-500 year protection and placing the upstream area in Rio Linda at risk of flooding in a 100-year is unacceptable.

I have not received any explanation of why the 500-year flood map displayed at two open house presentations by SAFCA is about 1 foot lower than the 100-year flood map from FEMA.

The floodwater has already been at or above the FEMA 100-year map in the area north of G Street and west of Tenth Street.

Copies of my letters to Mr. F.I. (Butch) Hodgkins dated December 13, 2000 and January 5, 2001 ate attached for your information.

Also a copy of my e-mail to Mr. Pete Rabbon of The Reclamation Board is attached.

Erwin Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95673
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
(Note: the copies referred to are previously included in this web page)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Ca.State Reclamation Board
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 08:39:43 PST
From: raya6@juno.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

February 4, 2001

TO: Mr. Pete Rabbon
Mr. Ricardo Pineda
The State of California Reclamation Board
1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, Ca.

SUBJECT: Permit # 16033-A-BD , Robla Creek South Levee Project

After attending SAFCA’s two Open Houses in November and December along with the Board meeting held on January 18, 2001 I am now convinced that the properties east of Dry Creek Road between Ascot and G Street are in greater danger of flooding than they were ever before..

Enclosed is a letter I have sent to the SAFCA board protesting the recommendations made by the staff of Option 2 and Option C of the final Draft for the Robla Creek EIR Report.. Along with my letter to you are copies of 531 signed petitions that were turned in to SAFCA from the many concerned Rio Linda property owners on the same issue..

I feel that the "Berm"/ "Levee" that is proposed for the westside of the RL Airport that will continue around the south end of the runway headed east to Bell Aqua water ski lakes and down the east side of Dry Creek Road to E street has the potential of storing more water that will inundate my house at 1240 E Street along with the homes on C street.. Coupled with the raising of the Levee to 44.4 feet and Dry Creek Road by two feet and the possibility of Magpie Creek, Robla Creek , and Dry Creek reaching new heights never seen before spells disaster...

SAFCA started this project without a permit in the 96 / 97 time frame until they were caught.. Now even with the permit # 16033-A BD they have not met their obligation and requirements as set forth in the permit with its special conditions one through fifty five.. Increasing levee heights and installing new levees that will impact property owners upstream goes against the special conditions spelled out in the document numbers forty-five through number fifty-five..

I am asking that no further work be done on the construction of new levees and or berms that will impact people that live up-stream of Dry Creek Road in the Robla Creek watershed.. With the improvements to be made to the local drainage and the new bridge and box culverts at Dry Creek Road and C Street should allow our local waters to dissipate faster than in the past.. If there were improvements also made to the Robla Creek bed by cleaning and leveling from McClellan AFB to Dry Creek Road, and correcting the pinch point at the E Street bridge (between Dry Creek Road and Raley Blvd) would also aid the water flow in this area..

Thank you for your consideration,

Ray & Neata Antonelli
1240 E Street
Rio Linda, Ca. 95673
E-mail-- raya6@juno.com

>From the Rio Linda mailing list
(Note: the enclosure referred to is previously included in this web page)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Fw: RE: SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 22:14:49 PST
From: raya6@juno.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

I received this today thought I would post it and reply tomorrow...

Ray Antonelli
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>
To: "'raya6@juno.com'" <raya6@juno.com>, "Hodgkins,
Butch (SAFCA)" <hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET>

Dear Ray:

Thank you for your email and comments at the last SAFCA Board meeting regarding the options for improving flood protection in North Sacramento and Rio Linda. It is my understanding that you have also met with Pete Gelfi of the SAFCA staff since you sent your email. As you know, the continuing effort of SAFCA is to provide as much flood protection as feasible and possible to all who live within the jurisdicitional boundaries of the agency. In that regard, the comments of those, such as you, who might be affected by the project under discussion are carefully considered.

Before the south levee was built, those who lived in Robla and North Sacramento were subject to an unacceptable risk of flooding. When the south levee was built to its current configuration, it provided some, but not enough, protection to those in Robla and North Sacramento. Since that time, the SAFCA and County staffs have worked hard to identify a further project which would increase protection to Rio Linda and assist Robla and North Sacramento as well.

The options under consideration by SAFCA and the County will accomplish a number of important goals. First, they will increase the level of flood protection for those in Robla, North Sacramento, Bell Aqua, and Western Acres. Second, for those, like you, living on the east side of Dry Creek Rd., water levels in rain events up to about 230 year events will have the water surface elevation reduced. Third, Dry Creek Rd. will be raised to provide a safe accessible route in and out of Rio Linda in 100 year events.

I understand that you are concerned because you beleive the raising of the road, in combination with other factors, creates a dam which places you at greater risk of flooding. We will continue to work with you to try to demonstrate that your concerns are addressed. This project is only an effort to improve conditions for everyone; not an effort to help some at the expense of others.

I hope the above is helpful.

ROGER DICKINSON
Supervisor, First District
County of Sacramento

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA Mitigation Attempt
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 23:34:54 PST
From: raya6@juno.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

February 5, 2001

TO: SAFCA BOARD OF DIRECTORS;
cc: Pete Ghelfi SAFCA
Director of Engineering

The State of California
Reclamation Board

Subject: Robla Creek Levee Project Meeting

I would like to thank the following members of SAFCA that attend a meeting at my home on February 2, 2001, Pete Ghelfi, John Bassett, Mike Peterson, Jack Buckley, and Kathy Kinsland along with concerned Rio Linda residents: Ewrin Hayer, Jay O'Brien, Charlotte Ketcherside, and myself..

The Engineering explanation that SAFCA presented on the water levels that we could expect on this property during a 10, 100, 200, and 500 major flood event both pre-project and post-project was very conceivable and theoretically possible, but all of it was based on the best information you have at the time that it was entered into the computer.. The conceptual concept of a computer aided water flow model is no better than the information that has been programmed into it..

The predications made by this computer model as to when Robla Creek and Dry Creek might or might not crest together, or have waters from Magpie Creek join the above two and cause a back up of water east of Dry Creek Road, or the NEMDC pumps are not turned on are the things it can not answer..

We all know how well computers can predict the weather forecasts and earthquakes, or volcano eruptions, so you will have to excuse me if I am very SKEPTICAL of your computer predictions while living on the WET side of an area you are building levees around..

Time will tell if your computer model is correct or not but none the less I still oppose the South Robla levee project.. This includes the building and raising of the levee height and the construction of the "berms" / "floodwalls" / or "levees" around the airport and Bell Aqua / Western Acres that put us at higher risk on the WET side of the Robla watershed..

You can say that this case is mitigated if SAFCA will sign a agreement to pay for all damages occurred both structural and for total content in the event that our home or shop should become inundated with water at either a 10, 100, 200 year events you listed... You can have option A or B , option A to raise the shop and house above flood levels or option B buy the property outright for a sum agreeable with Antonelli Trust... I will give you the benefit of doubt on the 500 year event as we both agree that we will flood at that stage..

Again thank you for your time and concern.. Please include this letter as a permanent part of the for the Lower Dry Creek and Robla Creek Levee Improvements Mitigation Project....

Ray & Neata Antonelli
1240 E Street
Rio Linda, Ca 95673
raya6@juno.com

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:26:06 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: rogerd@saccounty.net, raya6@juno.com, hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET
CC: illac@saccounty.net, murielj@saccounty.net, nielloroger@saccounty.net, donn@saccounty.net, RQuack4131@aol.com, jayobrien@att.net

Dear Roger Dickinson,

At the CPAC Meeting on January 9, 2001, Butch Hodgkins stated that because the Robla Creek South Levee has been raised, an increased risk of flooding has been created at Bell Acqua and Western Acres Subdivisions, the Bell Acqua Apartments and the Airport. Also he stated the homes were removed from Ascot Avenue and Dry Creek Road area, as that was cheaper to do than trying to flood protect them from the increased risk of flooding from the raised levee.

At the SAFCA Board meeting on January 18, 2001 you wanted to talk to me about the levees. The three minutes allowed for speakers is not enough time as I was able to cover only one item of many that I wanted to cover. I have sent many letters to SAFCA staff and I hope these letters have been forwarded to SAFCA Board Members.

At this same meeting, one board member commented that the construction of the levee around Bell Acqua, Airport and the subdivision with out paying into the assessment district is unfair. I say that it was unfair to construct the levee, which has increase the flood risk to many homes and business in the area described above. SAFCA staff and consultants originally said that this area would not have an increase in flooding because of the levee. SAFCA has bought and paid for flood insurance for many homes and business in this area after they agreed that the levee would increase the risk of flooding.

When levees are constructed to keep floodwater out of the historical floodplains, the floodwater on the wet side of the levees will get deeper under the same water flows.

The homes on Ascot Avenue and West Second Street area of Rio Linda are at increased risk since the north levee has been constructed. The floodwater gets higher on the wet side of the levees with the same water flow and the flap valve at drain N-1 does not open until the local floodwater on the dry side are higher than the floodwater on the wet side. SAFCA staff keeps saying that the floodwater on the wet side will drain before we get local rains on the dry side. This has not happened as portable pumps have been installed at the N-1 drain to pump the local rain water over the levee to prevent the homes on Ascot Avenue and West Second Street from flooding.This has been done multiple times since the north levee was constructed. The homes on Rio Linda Boulevard and Rose Street, just south of the Robla Creek South Levee, dry side, are also at increased risk of flooding due to the raising of the south levee. Portable pumps have been installed since the south levee was constructed to keep these homes from flooding.

Conditions will get worse in Rio Linda when the proposed Magpie Creek enlargement project is constructed. Almost 3 times the volume of floodwater will enter the Rio Linda area during a 100-year storm on the Magpie Creek Watershed if this project is completed as planned. This information is supplied by the US Army Corp of Engineers.

I understand the homes at Ascot Avenue/West Second, Rose Street and Rio Linda Boulevard are in the assessment district which is paying for the levees that have increased their risk of flooding. I do not think this is fair.

I am available to discuss the above with you at your convenience.

Erwin Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:36:13 PST
From: "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>
To: 'Erwin Hayer' <eeh625@hotmail.com>, "Dickinson, Roger"<rogerd@saccounty.net>, raya6@juno.com, "Hodgkins, Butch (SAFCA)"<hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET>
CC: "Collin, Illa" <illac@saccounty.net>, "Johnson, Muriel"<murielj@saccounty.net>, "Niello, Roger" <nielloroger@saccounty.net>, "Nottoli, Don" <donn@saccounty.net>, RQuack4131@aol.com, jayobrien@att.net

Dear Erwin:

Thanks for your email regarding the information as to conditions on the dry side of the north and south levees. I will discuss what you have described further with the SAFCA staff. However, in general, it seems better to me to address relatively minor accumulations of water on the dry side of a levee than leave people and structures at risk of disastrous flooding by not building up protection.

In the same vein, I have specifically discussed interior drainage for Bell Acqua and Western Acres with Pete Gelfi and Butch Hodgkins to find out what will happen if we build a perimeter levee to protect those areas. As I understand it, it appears that interior drainage is adequate with the possible exception that a couple of houses may need some further attention.

I appreciate your thoughts.

ROGER DICKINSON
Supervisor, First District
Sacramento County

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [RL] SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:33:17 PST
From: "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>
To: 'FRANCES B HOOD' <f.b.hood@juno.com>, riolinda@vrx.net, raya6@juno.com
CC: "Hodgkins, Butch (SAFCA)" <hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET>, "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>, "Collin, Illa" <illac@saccounty.net>, "Johnson, Muriel" <murielj@saccounty.net>, "Niello, Roger" <nielloroger@saccounty.net>, "Nottoli, Don" <donn@saccounty.net>, raya6@juno.com, RQuack4131@aol.com, eeh625@hotmail.com, riolinda@vrx.net

Dear Frances:

SAFCA staff has been working with interested residents, elected officials, and others for several years to attempt to identify an affordable solution which provides sufficient protection to Robla and North Sacramento while also helping those in Rio Linda. We have listened and will continue to do so in our effort to find the best solution.

ROGER DICKINSON
Supervisor, First District
Sacramento County

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [RL] SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:18:15 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: rogerd@saccounty.net
CC: riolinda@vrx.net

Dear Roger
The last mitigation meeting with SAFCA was in 1998 until the "open houses" of December 2000. I belive this was about 2 years of no mitigation on the increased flooding risks in Rio Linda.

I felt that SAFCA staff and board were going ahead with the project in violation of the Reclamation Board Special Conditions.

Erwin

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [RL] SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:19:21 PST
From: "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>
To: 'Erwin Hayer' <eeh625@hotmail.com>, "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>

Dear Erwin:

Thanks for your email. I'm not quite sure what you have in mind when you say "mitigation meeting", but SAFCA staff have met with various parties between 1998 and the "open houses". In addition, SAFCA purchased flood insurance for appropriate parties since the construction of the south levee.

To my knowledge, SAFCA has complied with the Reclamation Board conditions regarding the south levee. The current effort is to reach an appropriate level of flood protection for Robla and North Sacramento while also giving appropriate protection to potentially affected areas of Rio Linda. Your comments have been helpful in formulating the best approach.

ROGER DICKINSON
Supervisor, First District
Sacramento County

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [RL] SAFCA: Robla Creek Project
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:36:53 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: rogerd@saccounty.net
CC: riolinda@vrx.net

Dear Roger,

The last information that I received from SAFCA is dated August 31, 1998.

This is a letter from Paul T. Devereux, Director of Engineering to “Members of the Lower Dry Creek and Robla Creek Levee Improvements Mitigation Project.”

I considered these meetings as Mitigation Meetings in accordance with special conditions numbers 45 and 46 of The Reclamation Board Permit Number 16033-A-BD.

Sometimes this was called the Working Group, but I considered it Mitigation Meetings. I had attended every one of these meetings and also was attending the SAFCA Board of Directors meetings after September 1997 until December 1998. SAFCA Staff and Consultants seemed to always out number the community members.

At the first meeting, we asked to have the meetings in the evening so more community members could attend. This was turned down, but later SAFCA had an evening meeting with the community members east of Dry Creek Road and failed to let any of the day time attendees know about the evening meeting. In December 1998, with a telephone call to Paul T. Devereux, I ask about getting the agenda for future SAFCA Board meetings so I did not have to attend meetings that did not involve Rio Linda, Dry Creek, Robla Creek or Magpie Creek discussions. His answer was the agenda would be put on the Internet in January 1999 or I could subscribe to them for $20.00 per year. It was finally on the Internet in January 2001, 2 years later. During this 2 years, I can not find anyone who was notified about or attended any Mitigation Meetings. I do not consider the Open Houses at Rio Linda High School and Robla Elementary School as Mitigation Meetings as required by special conditions numbers 45 and 46 of The Reclamation Board Permit Number 16033-A-BD.

I still say the 500-year flood map displayed at the Open House meetings is very inaccurate. The floodwater across G Street from my home has exceeded SAFCA’s 500-year map many times.

I called Janice Hayer and she has not been notified of, or attended any mitigation meetings in 1998 or 2000 until the December 2000 Open house at Rio Linda High School. She also had attended all of the mitigation meetings of 1997 and 1998. Chris Quackenbush, Bill Mauser and Phil Todd were other persons from the community that attended.

I am very interested in knowing who and what was discussed between SAFCA Staff and “various parties” in 1998 and 2000 that you indicated in your response.

Erwin Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA Flood Map Questions
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:04:58 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET, rogerd@saccounty.net
CC: donn@saccounty.net, nielloroger@saccounty.net,murielj@saccounty.net, illac@saccounty.net, julie.blazona@asm.ca.gov,tovey, giezentanner@mail.house.gov, aaron.ferguson@mail.house.gov,bltk@aol.com, wathor@aol.com, bmitchell3@aol.com, Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov, prabbon@water.ca.gov, rpineda@water.ca.gov,riolinda@vrx.net, dwerkman@sacbee.com, franklinm@pwa.co.sacramento.ca.us

Dear Roger Dickinson

I still have a problem with the flood maps after watching the SAFCA Board of Directors Meeting, Feb 15, 2001. I was unable to attend this meeting and ask any questions.

Reference my e-mail to you Thursday, 8 Feb 2001, 11:27:06. Subject: SAFCA
500-year Flood Map as follows.

Dear Roger,

Reference Table 4a of the DSEIR, April 1997.

Location: Dry Creek South Branch and SNRR Bike trail, X=6719555, Y=2008379.
   100-year = 43.3’ pre project- 145,000 cfs American River, post project 43.4’
   200-year = 43.7’ pre & post project at 145,000 and 180,000cfs in American River
   500-year = 44.6’ pre & post project at 145,000 and 180,000cfs in American River
   The flood level listed in Sacramento County Records for this location is 44.4’ on 1/10/95.

Location: Dry Creek South Branch at Elkhorn Boulevard (was I (eye) Street), X=6720710, Y =2011470.
   100-year = 48.5’ pre & post project at 145,000 and 180,000cfs in American River
   200-year = 49.3’ pre & post project at 145,000 and 180,000cfs in American River
   500-year = 49.6’ pre & post project at 145,000 and 180,000cfs in American River
   The flood level listed in Sacramento County Records for this location is 48.4’U and 48.3’D’ on 1/10/95 with the record of 48.7’ on 2/20/86.

Yet I was in the water on Elkhorn Boulevard, about 300 feet east of the center of Dry Creek during the January 1995 floods. The elevation at this location on a SAFCA Topographic Map is 49.6’.

With reference to the above, I have come to the conclusion that we have had a 500 year flood on this stream, yet most agency’s say we had about a 95-year storm in January 1995.

This is why I do not believe the SAFCA 500-year map and data in the EIR’s are accurate. The FEMA 100-year flood map is more accurate in this area. Something is wrong with the water models that SAFCA is relying on.

Erwin

You brought up my concerns about the 500-year SAFCA verses the FEMA 100-year in the Elkhorn Boulevard and Tenth Street area. I did not understand the answers by Pete Ghelfi as he indicated the Elkhorn Boulevard Project would lower the flood waters.

The following is quoted from the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ELKHORN BOULEVARD WIDENING, RIO LINDA BOULEVARD TO DRY CREEK ROAD, January 1998. Control Number 97-PWE-0115, State Clearinghouse Number: 97102031, Page 5.6-5.

“Floodplain Maps
The FEMA 100-year floodplain boundaries were published in 1989 and assume land use at the time of mapping. However, these maps are not used by the County Water Resources Division (WRD) for setting lowest-floor elevations for new structures and enforcing the no-loss-of-volume policy on Dry Creek. Since approximately 1991, WRD has used its own 100-year flood elevations, which are typically 1.5 to 3.0 feet higher than FEMA’s base flood elevations due to projected future land use under adopted General Plans.”

Kamram Mahmoudi, insured me during the planning of the ELKHORN BOULEVARD WIDENING Project that the floodwater, under the same flow conditions, would not be higher or lower north or south of Elkhorn Boulevard. That is why the bypass channel and bridge were constructed to not change floodwater elevations upstream or downstream.

Now, if the Sacramento County WRD is saying that the FEMA 1998 100-year flood maps are 1.5 to 3.0 feet lower than WRD’s own updated flood maps, What flood maps are SAFCA using to indicate the 500-year storm floodwater is lower than FEMA’s 1998 flood maps?

I believe that the Sacramento County Water Resources Division, Development Review & Hydrology Department, is where Pete Ghelfi worked prior to working for SAFCA. I would think he would know of the policy of not using FEMA flood maps as they showed the water level lower by 1.5 to 3.0 feet than what was expected during the same size storm.

I still say, the floodwater has exceeded SAFCA’s 500-year map and matched FEMA’s 100-year in the area directly north of my home. I personally saw these water levels during the January 1995 storm.

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA MEETING 02-15-01
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:01:57 PST
From: raya6@juno.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

SAFCA MEETING 02/15/01

SAFCA board members my name is Ray Antonelli and I live at 1240 "E" street in Rio Linda. I would like to thank the SAFCA people that came to my house to try to assure me there is no real problem.. Well as you can see I’m still not convinced.. The levee’s that are proposed around Rio Linda Airport , Bell Aqua lakes and the sub divisions of Bell Aqua and Western Acres puts me and my neighbors living east of Dry Creek Road in the middle of a poetical Wet Zone... The proposed levee height of 50 feet starting at G Street and dropping to approx 45 feet around the airport and lakes you stated was to protect Bell Aqua and Western Acres that have elevations of:

Rio Linda Speedway         43.1 to 45.8 feet,
Western Acres                 44.1 to 50.6 feet
Bell Aqua Ski Park Drive 43.7 to 45.3 feet
Bell Aqua Apartments       42.1 to 43.4 feet
Boat Store                        44.5 feet
all on the west side of Dry Creek Road...

Now on the east side of Dry Creek road we have :
4 or 5 Houses on C street     42.1 to 43.7 feet
D. Bodenheimer E street      43.6 to 44.5
Our Property on E Street      43.1 to 45.2
Singer Property on E street   43.6 to 46.1

As your map shows Robla Creek will join the Magpie Diversion channel at Ascot and the high ground which in turn ties into the levee you already built which leaves us in between the two levees JUST A GREAT PLACE TO BE.

You are protecting people that are on higher ground at the expense of the resident’s who live east of Dry Creek Road the lower elevations. You're letting the big money in Gardenland / Natomas and the pricie Bell Aqua sub division dictate what you do to the less fortunate people in Rio Linda.. I still go on record as to do nothing more with levee’s and re-route and clean Robla Creek..

Thank you
Ray Antonelli

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Robla Creek Levee Permit 16033-A BD
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:36:04 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: prabbon@water.ca.gov, rpineda@water.ca.gov
CC: riolinda@vrx.net, kathy@argonautconsulting.com,franklinm@pwa.co.sacramento.ca.us

Pete Rabbon and Ricardo Pineda

I called this morning Pete, and you were in a meeting. I left a message and I hate to bother you, but I have some Questions and community members have also been asking questions.

1. Is SAFCA's Permit 16033-A BD still vaild?

2, Has SAFCA meet all of the conditions of Permit 16033-A-BD?

3. How can SAFCA Staff and Consultants justify a 500-year floodmap that shows the floodwater lower than it was in 1986 and 1995?

4. Have we had a 500-year flood on Dry Creek in the Rio Linda area?

5. Has FEMA changed the flood maps in the Rio Linda area since 1989?

6. Do you know of any Letter Of Map Revision (LOMR) being submitted to FEMA for the Rio Linda area?

7. Will SAFCA be required to have another hearing before the Reclamation Board prior to the start of construction on the Robla Creek South Levee?

Looking forward to your response.

Thanks and have a nice day.

Erwin E Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95673
eeh625@hotmail.com

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] 2001-02-22 - Permit 16033-A BD Update
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:00:50 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Subject: 2001-02-22 - Permit 16033-A BD Update
Feb 22, 2001

Hello All Rio Linda Net Listener/Readers

I just received a telephone call from Steve Bradley, Chief Engineer for the State Reclamation Board this morning.

He stated the Reclamation Board was getting many calls on the Robla Creek Project and I want to Thank all who called.

He asked for some background and I gave him a little history on the area and asked him about the e-mail I sent to Pete Rabbon and Ricardo Pineda on 16 Feb 2001.

He said he is working on the answers and it would be 2 or 3 weeks before he could give me any answers. He said it would be answered in writing. I will get the answers on the RL Net as soon as I receive them.

He also said he had a call from Pete Ghelfi of SAFCA about a date for a hearing.

He told me that a hearing could not be scheduled before April 2001 at the earliest.

When I get information on the date of a hearing, I will post it on the RL Net.

Thanks again for all the help

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] FIRM 060262-0065E-F
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 00:04:10 PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: mary.lyle@fema.gov
CC: assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,riolinda@vrx.net, franklinma@saccounty.net, Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov

Dear Mary Ann Lyle

I live at 950 G Street, Rio Linda, CA 95673 and I am having trouble understanding the flood information being put out to the Rio Linda Community by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA).

I have a copy of your FIRM 060262-0065E, dated November 15, 1989 and SAFCA has displayed their 500-year flood map at two community open houses.

In the area directly north of my home, SAFCA’s 500-year flood map shows the water lower than FEMA’s FIRM 060262-0065E. I am under the impression that the FIRM is showing an estimated 100-year flood.

During the floods on the Dry Creek Watershed in January 1995, all stream gages upstream of my home set records on January 10, 1995. SAFCA has indicated to me that the Jan 1995 storm was around a 95-year. The floodwater just north of my home almost matched your FIRM 060262-0065E exactly. That is why I am having trouble understanding how a 500-year storm would have lower floodwater than a 100-year storm.

I sent the following e-mail and have not had a response as of today.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

TO: bakermail@mbakercorp.com
SUBJECT: Flood Insurance Rate Map
DATE: 9 Feb 2001
FEMA Map Section
I have a map, Community-Panel Number 060262 0065 E which is Revised November 15, 1989. Do you have any Letters of Map Revisions for this map?
I ordered the whole set which covered the Sacramento County Unincorporated Areas north of the Sacramento City limits from the Sacramento
River on the west and Watt Avenue on the east. I received these maps around January 1998.
Is an index available and also a list of any Letters of Map Revisions for the area described above?
Erwin E. Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95673

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Also, Roger Dickinson is my representative to the SAFCA Board of Directors and e-mail to him and Butch Hodgkins, Director of SAFCA follows. I have not received any response from them as of today.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
[See February 15 email above to Dickinson and Hodgkins]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The following is e-mail I sent to the state Reclamation Board Manager Manager, Pete Rabbon. Steve Bradley, Chief Engineer called me on February 22, 2001 and said he is working on the answers and to give him 2 or 3 weeks.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
[See February 16 email above to Rabbon]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Mary Ann, If you have made it to this point, I hope you can understand why I can not trust the local Government Agencies. I do have trust in the Reclamation Board.

The City of Sacramento has already got SAFCA to raise levees down stream so as to protect North Natomas for development, use to be rice farm land. When the storm water is at floodstage on the American River, it causes the floodwater to back-up/pond in our area. Raising the levees down stream will only make it worse.

The cites of Roseville, Rocklin and Loomis are cleaning the streams upstream and approving all kinds of development, buildings, parking and streets and causing the storm water to move to Rio Linda faster.

I have lived within 1 mile of my present address since 1942 and have seen many floods in this area.

At the present time, NO flood control/protection has been done on the Dry Creek stream as it passes through the Rio Linda/Elverta area of northern Sacramento County. In fact, all of the development downstream and upstream has increased the flood risks. If SAFCA raises the American River Levees more as they want to do and increase the outlets on Folsom Dam so the water can be let out faster, it will only get deeper in Rio Linda.

I would like to find out about any Letter Of Map Revision (LMOR) for FIRM 060262-0065E and FIRM 060262-0065F, which I am ordering. Also, how can I get copies of any LOMR’s and Who submits/approves them?

Who would be a contact in FEMA’s San Francisco Office?

Thank you for any information,

Erwin E. Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95673
e-mail eeh625@hotmail.com

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Follow-Up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 09:19:03 -0800
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: rogerd@saccounty.net
CC: assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,riolinda@vrx.net, franklinma@saccounty.net, Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov

Subject: Follow-Up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: March 5, 2001

Dear Roger Dickinson,

>From your 7 Feb 2001 e-mail:

”Thanks for your email. I'm not quite sure what you have in mind when you say "mitigation meeting", but SAFCA staff have met with various parties between 1998 and the "open houses".”

I hope my 7 Feb 2001 e-mail cleared up the term “mitigation meeting” for you.

Also, I am still interested in who the various parties that SAFCA staff met with in the Rio Linda Community and what was discussed about the Robla Creek South Levee Project between December 1998 and December 2000.

Another problem is understanding how SAFCA’s 500-year flood map is lower than FEMA’s 100-year, even though Sacramento County Water Resources Division (WRD) indicates that FEMA’s 1989 100-year flood map is from 1.5 to 3.0 feet too low and since 1991, the WRD has been using their own 100-year flood map.

I am still convinced that something is wrong with someone’s computer water models for the Rio Linda/Elverta area.

It looks as if there are three different 100-year flood maps for the Rio Linda/Elverta area. FEMA’s, SAFCA’s and Sacramento County WRD and the flood water elevations vary from 1.5 to 3.0 feet on the three maps.

Have these three government agencies communicated with each other over this problem?

Has SAFCA or Sacramento County WRD submitted any Letter Of Map Revisions (LOMR) to FEMA for the Rio Linda/Elverta area?

I would like a copy of the WRD 100-year flood map of the Rio Linda/Elverta area if it were available to the public.

Again, I thank you for your time trying to get answers for me and the community.

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Follow-Up: Robla Creek Levee Permit 16033-A BD
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 20:59:45 -0800
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: prabbon@water.ca.gov
CC: assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,riolinda@vrx.net, kathy@argonautconsulting.com,franklinma@saccounty.net, rogerd@saccounty.net,doug.ose@mail.house.gov

Mr. Rabbon

Steve Bradley called me on Feb 22, 2001 and said he would have a written answer to my Feb 16, 2001 e-mail to you (included below) in two or three weeks.

Four weeks, and no response.

I do not have Steve's e-mail address or I would send this directly to him.

Can you give me another date for expecting a response?

Thanks

Erwin Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Pete Rabbon and Ricardo Pineda

I called this morning Pete, and you were in a meeting. I left a message and I hate to bother you, but I have some Questions and community members have also been asking questions.

1. Is SAFCA's Permit 16033-A BD still vaild?
2, Has SAFCA meet all of the conditions of Permit 16033-A-BD?
3. How can SAFCA Staff and Consultants justify a 500-year floodmap that shows the floodwater lower than it was in 1986 and 1995?
4. Have we had a 500-year flood on Dry Creek in the Rio Linda area?
5. Has FEMA changed the flood maps in the Rio Linda area since 1989?
6. Do you know of any Letter Of Map Revision (LOMR) being submitted to FEMA for the Rio Linda area?
7. Will SAFCA be required to have another hearing before the Reclamation Board prior to the start of construction on the Robla Creek South Levee?

Looking forward to your response.

Thanks and have a nice day.

Erwin E Hayer
eeh625@hotmail.com

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] 2nd Follow-up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 21:40:19 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: rogerd@saccounty.net
CC: mauserwt@aol.com, jbmitchell3@aol.com, jmccarthy@kxtv.com,RLNEWS@aol.com, dwerkman@sacbee.com,anchorsandreporters@thekcrachannel.com,assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,scohn@cityofsacramento.org, hfargo@cityofsacramento.org,neilloroger@saccounty.net, murielj@saccounty.net,illac@saccounty.net, donn@saccounty.net, Clyde.macdonald@asm.ca.gov,Amy.dean@sen.ca.gov, senator@feinstein.senate.gov,senator@boxer.senate.gov, doug.ose@mail.house.gov, riolinda@vrx.net,eeh625@hotmail.com

Subject: 2nd Follow-Up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: April 3, 2001

Dear Roger Dickinson,

This is my second Follow-up and I would like to have some answers.

If you are unable to answer the questions, then would you please let me know who might be able to answer the questions which I submitted to you February 5, 2001 and March 5, 2001.

Also, my 5 February 2001 e-mail to you had the following: ---- snip ---- At the SAFCA Board meeting on January 18, 2001 you wanted to talk to me about the levees. The three minutes allowed for speakers is not enough time as I was able to cover only one item of many that I wanted to cover. I have sent many letters to SAFCA staff and I hope these letters have been forwarded to SAFCA Board Members. ---- snip ---- I am available to discuss the above with you at your convenience. ---- snip ----

I am still available at your convenience to discuss levee,s as you requested at the SAFCA Board Meeting on January 18, 2001.

I am patiently awaiting for the answers to my questions of 7 February and 5 March 2001. The 5 March e-mail is included below as a refresher.

Respectively,

Erwin Hayer

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Subject: Follow-Up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: March 5, 2001

Dear Roger Dickinson,

From your 7 Feb 2001 e-mail:
”Thanks for your email. I'm not quite sure what you have in mind when you say "mitigation meeting", but SAFCA staff have met with various parties between 1998 and the "open houses".”

I hope my 7 Feb 2001 e-mail cleared up the term “mitigation meeting” for you.

Also, I am still interested in who the various parties that SAFCA staff meet with in the Rio Linda Community and what was discussed about the Robla Creek South Levee Project between December 1998 and December 2000.

Another problem is understanding how SAFCA’s 500-year flood map is lower than FEMA’s 100-year, even though Sacramento County Water Resources Division (WRD) indicates that FEMA’s 1989 100-year flood map is from 1.5 to 3.0 feet to low and since 1991, the WRD has been using their own 100-year flood map.

I am still convinced that something is wrong with someone’s computer water models for the Rio Linda/Elverta area.

Have these three government agencies communicated with each other over this problem?

Has SAFCA or Sacramento County WRD submitted any Letter Of Map evisions (LOMR) to FEMA for the Rio Linda/Elverta area?

I would like a copy of the WRD 100-year flood map of the Rio Linda/Elverta area if it were available to the public.

Again, I thank you for your time trying to get answers for me and the community.

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] How to Contact Reclamation Board Members
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:44:43 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: pamb@water.ca.gov
CC: RLNEWS@aol.com, riolinda@vrx.net

Subject: How to Contact Reclamation Board Members
Date: April 6, 2001

Dear Pamela Bruner

If I send Information to: The Reclamation Board, 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1601, Sacramento, CA 95814, How can I be sure it was forwarded to and received by the new Reclamation Board members?

Will any contact information such as: phone and fax numbers, postal and e-mail address be available to the public?

Thank You,

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Fwd: RE: 2nd Follow-up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 21:04:07 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

RL Net

I received this from Roger This afternoon after leaving telephone messages twice to call me. I hope he doesn't wait another 60 days.

Erwin Hayer
-----------------------

From: "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>
To: 'Erwin Hayer' <eeh625@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: 2nd Follow-up, Robla Creek South Levee Project
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:26:34 -0700
Dear Erwin:
I will follow up on your requests. I haven't intended to ignore you, I've just been quite busy with a number of other issues. I'll follow up with the SAFCA and County staff as soon as I can.
Roger

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Reclamation Board Answer???
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 22:56:39 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

RL Net

This is the answer to my Feb 16, 2001 e-mail to Pete Rabbon of the Reclamation Board. It was a letter and Jan O'Brien scaned it for me so I could send it to the RL Net. Thanks Jan.

I do not agree with some of the answers and will be submitting more to Roger Dickinson.

Erwin

THE RECLAMATION BOARD
1416 NINTH STREET, ROOM 1601
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 663-5434 FAX: (916) 653-5805
Permits:(916) 653-5726 FAX: (916) 653-5805

April 6, 2001

Mr. Erwin E. Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95873

Dear Mr. Hayer:
This is in reply to your e-mail of February 20, 2001 to The Reclamation Board regarding the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency project for the Robla/Dry Creek area.

For reference, your questions have been repeated verbatim and shown in bold. The Board's response follows each question.

"1. Is SAFCA's Permit 16033-A BD still valid?"

Yes, Encroachment Permit No. 16033-A BD is still valid but will be revised to include the proposed mitigation modifications.

"2. Has SAFCA met all of the conditions of Permit 16033-A-BD?"

SAFCA is in compliance with the conditions of Permit No. 16033-A BD. It has not met all the conditions of the permit since some conditions can only be fulfilled upon completion of the project.

"3. How can SAFCA Staff and Consultants justify a 500-year floodmap that shows the floodwater lower than it was in 1986 and 1885?"

Please contact SAFCA to resolve this question.

"4. Have we had a 500-year flood on Dry Creek in the Rio Linda area?"

Please contact the Sacramento County Water Resources Department or SAFCA to resolve this question.

"5. Has FEMA changed the flood maps in the Rio Linda area since 1989?"

The maintaining agency for the FEMA flood Insurance rate map for the Rio Linda area is the Sacramento County Water Resources Department. This agency should be contacted for any information relating to National Flood Insurance Program mapping.

"6. Do you know of any Letter Of Map Revision (LOMR) being submitted to FEMA for the Rio Linda area?"

The maintaining agency for the FEMA flood insurance rate map for the Rio Linda area is the Sacramento County Water Resources Department. This agency should be contacted for any information relating to changes in National Flood Insurance Program maps.

"7. Will SAFCA be required to have another hearing before the Reclamation Board prior to the start of construction on the Robla Creek South Levee?"

Yes, Encroachment Permit No, 16033-A BD will be revised to include proposed mitigation modifications. Revision of the permit will require approval by the Board. The project is tentatively scheduled for the May 18, 2001 Reclamation Board meeting. Notice of the meeting, including time and location, and an agenda will be mailed to interested parties prior to the meeting.

If you have any questions, you may contact me at (916) 653-8089.

Sincerely,
/s/
Stephen T. Bradley
Chief Engineer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA Unanswered Questions
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:02:22 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: rogerd@saccounty.net
CC: assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,matt0612@aol.combltk@aol.comwathor@aol.comjbmitchell3@aol.comSPZNTAZ@softcom.netBOBRAC25@aol.commauserwt@aol.com,scohn@cityofsacramento.org, hfargo@cityofsacramento.org,nielloroger@saccounty.net, murielj@saccounty.net,illac@saccounty.net, donn@saccounty.net, Clyde.macdonald@asm.ca.gov,Amy.dean@sen.ca.gov, hodgkinsb@saccounty.net,franklinma@saccounty.net, kathy@argonautconsulting.com,senator@feinstein.senate.gov, senator@boxer.senate.gov,doug.ose@mail.house.gov, riolinda@vrx.net

Subject: SAFCA Unanswered Questions
Date April 10, 2001

Dear Roger Dickinson

I have two questions that I have been unable to get answered.

Question # 1. How can SAFCA Staff and Consultants justify displaying a 500-year flood map that shows the floodwater lower than it was in 1986 and 1995?

This question was asked of F.I.(Butch) Hodgkins and Timothy N. Washburn at the SAFCA open house at Robla School on December 13, 2000. This problem was also brought up in my letter to Mr. Hodgkins, dated January 5, 2001. It was again brought up in my letter to the SAFCA Board of Directors, dated February 2, 2001. I also sent you E-mail on February 8, 2001 with documentation on why the SAFCA 500-year flood map was in error.

As of today no one has responded to any of my letters or e-mail on this problem. My 3 minutes time ran out before I could bring this up at the SAFCA Board of Directors meeting on February 15, 2001 and I was unable to attend the March 15, 2001 meeting.

From what I have been able to find out, No one from SAFCA Staff or SAFCA Board of Directors mentioned or asked about the accuracy of SAFCA’s 500-year flood map at the Board of Directors meetings. No one has contacted me about this problem.

Question # 2. Have we had a 500-year flood on Dry Creek in the Rio Linda area?

I sent an E-mail message to you on February 8, 2001 which used Sacramento County Records to show that the floodwater in the Rio Linda area had exceeded SAFCA’s 500-year flood map on February 2, 1986 and January 10, 1995. As of today, I have not received an answer to this question.

I am requesting answers to the above questions be sent to me prior to May 17, 2001.

I just found out that the proposed Revision of Encroachment Permit No. 16033-A-BD requested by SAFCA has tentatively scheduled for The Reclamation Board meeting of May 18, 2001.

Now, I have another question. Did my letter to SAFCA Board of Directors, dated February 2, 2001, which I sent to 1007 Seventh Street get distributed to all the SAFCA Board of Directors?

Sincerely,

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Ltr to Rec Brd on Permit 10633-A-BD
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:34:56 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: riolinda@vrx.net
To: pamb@water.ca.gov, prabbon@water.ca.gov, riolinda@vrx.net
CC: MaryAnne.Lyle@fema.gov, bltk@aol.com, wathor@aol.com,jbmitchell3@aol.com, jmccarthy@kxtv.com, RLNEWS@aol.com,dwerkman@sacbee.com, anchorsandreporters@thekcrachannel.com,assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,senator@feinstein.senate.gov, senator@boxer.senate.gov,doug.ose@mail.house.gov

Following is the coorspondence to be delivered to the Reclamation Board Friday morning.

Erwin Hayer
---------------------------------
The Reclamation April 20, 2001
1416 Ninth Street, Room 1601
Sacramento, CA 95814

Subject: Permit Number 10633-A-BD, Robla Creek South Levee Stage 2 Improvements.

Ladies and Gentlemen of The Reclamation Board,

I have been a resident of Rio Linda since 1942 and I have observed many floods in this area.

I was raised on a Dairy Farm in Rio Linda owned by my parents. This farm was on the property that now contains Rio Linda Senior High School, Rio Linda Junior High School, Roy E Hayer Park, Central Park Horse Arena, Rio Linda Airport, Western acres Subdivision, Bell Acqua Subdivision, Bell Acqua Apartments, and Bell Acqua Water Ski Lakes.

Dry Creek and Robla Creek both flowed through the Dairy Farm. We have a dam on Dry Creek, built about 1929, which allowed us to irrigate over 150 acres of pasture by gravity flow and no pumps. Only about 50 acres have been farmed recently and the primary use of the dam is for the water supply to Bell Acqua Lakes plus creating a lake between Roy E. Hayer Park and The Horse Arena Park during the summer. Needless to say, by being involved in the operation of the dam on Dry Creek from 1942 to the present, I have gained a lot of respect for high water flows. Also, I have observed all of the floods since 1942 on Dry Creek and Robla Creek (It was called Linda Creek when I was in Rio Linda Grammar School and is called Rio Linda Creek in the 2000 Thomas Guide).

Now we have Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) making changes to the water flow by raising levees and reducing the floodway or floodplain width down stream, (for development within the city limits of Sacramento) which causes higher water levels for longer periods of time under the same flow conditions. Then development, Roofs, blacktop and storm drains in Placer County up stream are causing the water to raise faster in Rio Linda and Elverta. With these two problems and the Rio Linda and Elverta communities in between, it is causing increased flooding risks. To this date, additional flood protection for the Rio Linda and Elverta communities on Dry Creek and Robla Creek has not been provided by any government agency.

A choke point has been created just down stream of Rio Linda Boulevard, which is just down stream of the southern portion of Rio Linda, by reducing the width of the floodway or floodplain by about 800 feet. SAFCA’s own water models show an increase in floodwater levels because of the narrower floodway or floodplain.

Just upstream of this choke point, Dry Creek north/west, Dry Creek south/east, Robla Creek and Magpie Creek Diversion channels converge into one stream during floods.

On January 10, 1995, according to California Data Exchange Center (CDEC) and Sacramento County Water Resources Division (ALERT), high floodwater level records were established on all operating CDEC and ALERT sensors in the Dry Creek watershed upstream of the Rio Linda and Elverta communities. Also, all operating CDEC and ALERT sensors on Arcade Creek watershed established high floodwater level records the same day. The Arcade Creek watershed is just south/east of the Magpie Creek watershed and enters the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC) about 2.7 miles downstream of where Dry Creek, Robla Creek and Magpie Creek Diversion channel come together and enter the NEMDC. With all operating sensors on the Dry Creek and Arcade Creek watersheds setting records the same day, I believe Robla Creek and Magpie Creek also had record flows the same day.

Now, about the modification of permit 16033-A-BD.

I had concerns about a levee around Western Acres and Bell Acqua Subdivisions, which was to protect them from Robla Creek. If this levee were constructed without protection from Dry Creek to the north along Tenth Street, then a flood of just over a 100-year would fill the lower portion of Western Acres and Bell Acqua Subdivisions homes. Floodwater on January 10,1995 was about 0.2 feet below the crown of 49.1 feet on Tenth Street and a slight rise in the floodwater at this point would have water entering the protected area. I live about 200 feet south of the crown. My floor elevation is 49.5 feet and Tenth Street drops to 47.4 feet as it passes my home and continues to drop to an elevation of 42.5 at E Street, which is the entrance to the Rio Linda Airport and Bell Acqua Lake One. I have never been concerned about my home flooding, but many of the homes in the subdivisions south of me have floor elevations of less than 44.0 feet and some less than 43.0 feet. If the levee was built to 45.8 feet as originally proposed by SAFCA, then it could have been a bathtub for many homes if the floodwater entered the protected area via Tenth Street. The proposed levee elevation has been reduced from 45.8 to 44.4 feet on the north and south sides of Robla Creek, just south of Western Acres and Bell Acqua areas by SAFCA. SAFCA has told me that they would put a floodwall along the north side of the sidewalk on G Street and then north along Tenth Street to the crown with a top elevation of 50 feet. This floodwall would vary in height from between 1 and 2 feet. If this were done, then these homes may be protected from Dry Creek floodwater from the north.

I am also concerned about the few homes on Ascot Avenue and West Second Street, which are in Sacramento County. The south side of Ascot Avenue is Sacramento City and no homes are in this area of the city. When the north levee was constructed, within the city, a culvert and flap valve (N-1) was installed to allow the local rainwater to pass through the levee when the water on the wet side receded. Because of the choke point created at this location by reducing floodway or floodplain width by about 800 feet, the floodwater is now higher and stays up longer under the same flow conditions, thus the local rain water can not enter Dry Creek through Culvert N-1. Portable Pumps have been installed to pump the local rainwater over the levee to prevent these homes from flooding many times since the levee was constructed. I did not find out who installed these pumps and I have been unable to find out who is responsible to install them when needed. This area is listed as Zone X in the FEMA Map 060262-0065F, dated July 6, 1998.

This same problem has existed at Rose Street areas, since the south levee was constructed to 42.0 feet and without the portable pumps, some homes on Rose Street would have flooded. The rain water used to go north to Robla Creek but now must go through a drain culvert under the Bike Trail and then through Culvert S-10. This area is listed as Zone X in the FEMA Map 060266-0005F, dated July 6, 1998.

Another home is at risk on Rio Linda Boulevard near Culvert S-10. This area is listed as Zone AH in the FEMA Map 060266-0005F, dated July 6, 1998.

Now I am concerned that the same problems will arise at the proposed Culvert Flap Valve that would drain the Western Acres and Bell Acqua areas into Robla Creek.

I have questions on SAFCA’s 500-year flood event map, which was displayed at SAFCA’s Open House in the Rio Linda High School on November 30, 2000. It was again displayed at Robla School December 13, 2000. I had brought a copy of FEMA’s 100 year Federal Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) with me and asked F.I (Butch) Hodgkins and Timothy N. Washburn why SAFCA’s 500-year map shows water levels lower than FEMA’s FIRM 060262-0065F, dated July 6, 1998 directly across G Street from my home. During the January 1995 flood, the water levels just across G Street from my home met or slightly exceeded FEMA’s FIRM 060262-0065F. The FIRM was shown to Mr. Hodgkins, Mr. Washburn and some of SAFCA consultants at the Robla School Open House. They could not give me an answer except to say the water models used by SAFCA were more current than FEMA’s. If this is true, we have had a more than 500-year flood on Dry Creek. I do not believe this.

Then I found a comment in DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ELKHORN BOULEVARD WIDENING, RIO LINDA BOULEVARD TO DRY CREEK ROAD, January 1998. Control Number 97-PWE-0115, State Clearinghouse Number: 97102031, Page 5.6-5.

(Quote)
“Floodplain Maps
The FEMA 100-year floodplain boundaries were published in 1989 and assume land use at the time of mapping. However, these maps are not used by the County Water Resources Division (WRD) for setting lowest-floor elevations for new structures and enforcing the no-loss-of-volume policy on Dry Creek. Since approximately 1991, WRD has used its own 100-year flood elevations, which are typically 1.5 to 3.0 feet higher than FEMA’s base flood elevations due to projected future land use under adopted General Plans.”
(End of quote)

Sacramento County WRD is saying that the FEMA 1989 100-year flood maps are 1.5 to 3.0 feet lower than WRD’s own updated flood maps in this area. What flood maps are SAFCA using to indicate the 500-year storm floodwater is lower than FEMA’s 1989 flood maps? I have been unable to get an answer to this question from SAFCA Staff or SAFCA Board of Directors.

Because of the non answers to questions by me on the SAFCA 500-year flood map from SAFCA Staff and SAFCA Board of Directors, (see attachments) I do not believe the water models that SAFCA Staff and Consultants are using are more accurate than FEMA’s. In particular, since the floodwater has been equal to or slightly exceeded the 100-year FIRM 060262-0065F which is higher than SAFCA’s 500-year flood map.

In addition, when Magpie Creek Diversion is widened as planned to allow 2 ½ times as much water into Robla Creek, I question the water models in this area. I have already seen the water higher than SAFCA predicts for a 200-year flood in this area, which can influence the flood water level at homes on C and E Street upstream of Dry Creek Road.

How was SAFCA able to reduce the volume of Dry Creek by reducing the width of the floodplain/floodway down stream of Rio Linda Boulevard where Magpie, Robla and Dry Creeks merge if Sacramento County WRD is enforcing the no-loss-of-volume policy on Dry Creek? . I have not asked SAFCA or Sacramento WRD this question yet, but I will.

Because of the above, I am requesting that the Reclamation Board disapprove SAFCA’s request to revise Permit 16033-A-BD.

Erwin E. Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95673
(916) 991-5940 Fax: (916) 991-1180
E-mail: eeh625@hotmail.com

Attachments
1. Letter to Mr. Hodgkins, dtd Dec 13, 2000. No response.
2. Letter to Mr. Hodgkins, dtd Jan 5, 2001. No response.
3. Letter to SAFCA Board of Directors, dtd Feb 2, 2001. No response.
4. E-mail to Mr. Dickinson, dtd Feb 8 2001. SAFCA 500-year Floodmap. No response.
5. E-mail to Mr. Dickinson, dtd Mar 5, 2001, 1st follow-up. No response.
6. E-mail to Mr. Dickinson, dtd Apr 3, 2001, 2nd Follow-up.
7. E-mail from Mr. Dickinson, dtd Apr 6, 2001, Answer to 2nd follow-up. No Answers.
8. Letter from Mr. Bradley, Answers to my e-mail to Mr. Rabbon, dated Feb 16,2001.

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] EEH verbal testimony to Rec Brd
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:41:26 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: pamb@water.ca.gov, prabbon@water.ca.gov, riolinda@vrx.net
CC: MaryAnne.Lyle@fema.gov, bltk@aol.com, wathor@aol.com,jbmitchell3@aol.com, jmccarthy@kxtv.com, RLNEWS@aol.com,dwerkman@sacbee.com, anchorsandreporters@thekcrachannel.com,assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,senator@feinstein.senate.gov, senator@boxer.senate.gov,doug.ose@mail.house.gov

FYI

The following is my planned verbal testimony to the Rec Board tomorrow morning.

Erwin Hayer
--------------------------------
Ladies and Gentlemen of The Reclamation Board,

My name is Erwin Hayer. I am here to give you some information on the Robla Creek South Levee Stage 2 Improvements Permit Number 10633-A-BD.

I question the accuracy of SAFCA’s 500-year flood event map showing floodwater elevations lower than FEMAS’s 100-year flood event map, FIRM 060262-0065F, dated July 6, 1998.

Since approximately 1991, Sacramento County Water Resources Division has used its own 100-year flood elevations, which are typically 1.5 to 3.0 feet higher than FEMA’s base flood elevations due to projected future land use under adopted General Plans.

I had questioned Butch Hodgkins and Timothy Washburn why SAFCA’s 500-year map showed water levels lower than FEMA’s 100-year map. This was at Robla School during SAFCA’s open house on December 13, 2000. I informed them that during the January 1995 flood, the water levels just across G Street from my home met or slightly exceeded FEMA’s 100-year map, which is higher than SAFCA’s 500-year map. They indicated FEMA’s map was not up to date. If this is true, then we have had a flood event of more than 500-years on Dry Creek, which I do not believe.

My letter to Mr. Hodgkins on December 13, 2000 asked for clarification on SAFCA’s 500-year map. I again asked him about this map in a letter dated January 5, 2001. On February 2, 2001, I sent a letter to SAFCA Board Members again asking about the accuracy of this map. As of today, I have not received any correspondence or e-mail or phone calls from Mr. Hodgkins or anyone else at SAFCA.

On February 8, 2001, I sent e-mail to SAFCA Board Member Roger Dickinson using data from Sacramento County Records on why SAFCA’s 500-year map was in error. I followed up to Mr. Dickinson on March 5, 2001 and April 3, 2001. Finally, I received an answer from Mr. Dickinson on April 6, 2001, which states: (Quote) “I will follow up on your requests. I haven't intended to ignore you, I've just been quite busy with a number of other issues. I'll follow up with the SAFCA and County staff as soon as I can.” (End of quote).

I have been trying to get answers for the Rio Linda and Elverta community and myself on many issues about SAFCA’s plans since December 2000 and the response from Mr. Dickinson just quoted is the only response. It did not answer any of my questions. This inaction by government agencies and elected officials is unacceptable.

If the water model used by SAFCA is as erroneous for other areas as it is in my neighborhood, then all of SAFCA’s plans are no good and all the communities will have a false sense of flood protection.

I have lived and worked in this area for 59 years. I have observed all the floods on Dry Creek and Robla Creek since 1942. I believe my experience is being ignored by SAFCA.

I get the feeling that SAFCA and the Cities of Sacramento, Roseville, Rocklin and Loomis want to use Rio Linda and Elverta for a detention pond and would like for me to disappear. I am not going away.

Thank you for your Time.

Erwin Hayer, April 20, 2001.

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Flood, Water, Energy and Garbage Problems
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:54:10 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov
CC: assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov,mauserwt@aol.com, matt0612@aol.com, bltk@aol.com, wathor@aol.com,jbmitchell3@aol.com, RLNEWS@aol.com, riolinda@vrx.net

Congressman Doug Ose

I apologize for being late to your Town Hall meeting at Dry Creek School in Rio Linda on April 20, 2001. I had spent the morning at the State Reclamation Board meeting, giving the newly appointed Reclamation Board testimony on the SAFCA Robla Creek Project which is tenatively scheduled to be on their agenda for a vote on May 18, 2001.. I felt that my presentation, if given on May 18 just prior to the vote, would most likely be ignored or the vote would be put off another month.

I gave you my card and a copy of my testimony to the Reclamation Board at your Town Hall Meeting.

When you call me about SAFCA’s 500-year flood event map, could you please have a copy of FEMA’s FIRM 060262-0065F on hand for comparison.

WE NEED AUBURN DAM. It is needed for flood control, for water supplies, for electrical energy production and for recreation for a growing California.

I look around and see all of the development in the Central Valley of California and I wonder where the electrical power will come from and where will the drinking water will come from. I know that the present construction pace of water supplies and electrical power generation is unable to keep up with the development of customers, mostly new homes.

We are also having a problem with the waste produced such as wastewater and garbage, including used tires.

If all the new Electrical Generating Plants are going to use natural gas to power them, then we will run out of natural gas too.

We need more electrical generation plants that can use treated wastewater and consume the garbage that we are created for their fuel.

Thank you for your time,

Erwin Hayer

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Rec Board Meeting, Friday 20 April
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:06:20 -0700
From: Raymond T Antonelli <raya6@juno.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Erwin Hayer and I attended the Reclamation Board meeting Friday April 20, 2001 when the newly appointed board members were introduced. This is what I said during my 3 minutes.. Erwin spoke on how SAFCA and FEMA are inconscient on their 100 and 500 year flood maps. Some what amusing we caught SAFCA director Butch Hodgkin off guard.. After Erwin and I spoke he tried a little battle damage repair as then he had to get up and told the new board that he was unprepared to speak on the subject today it is scheduled for next month.. He assured the board members that Mr. Hayer's and Mr. Antonelli's problems and concerns were being dealt with by his staff.. A small shot for our side..

Ray

April 20,2001

Subject: Permit # 10633 A-BD Robla Creek South Levee Project

Ladies and Gentleman of the Reclamation Board:

My name is Ray Antonelli I’m a 60 year resident of Rio Linda and I live at 1240 E Street about 1200 ft east of Dry Creek Road. I have lived around and through the flooding areas in this community for many years. In 1985 we build a new home on a 5-acre parcel at an elevation of 45.1feet as specified by the county in mind that we had Robla creek running through the rear of our property.

In 1986, we had a large amount of water on the back of our property and the joining undeveloped property immediately to the west of us.This land borders Dry Creek Road and runs along our whole property line on the west.During the highest water level our home was not in jeopardy of being inundated with floodwaters.We immediately experienced higher waters around our property after the first levee was build on the south side of Robla Creek in 1995.Even though we had more water backup from local run off during these storms we were still not in danger of flooding.In 1997, 98, and 99, after the levee was completed at a 42- foot elevation the water level was higher than we had ever seen it and was a matter of inches from entering our garage.

At a local CPAC (Community Planning action Committee) meeting Butch Hodgkins Director of SAFCA was asked about building a new flood wall around Western Acres and Bell Aqua properties he responded that it was needed to keep flood waters out of that area.He was then asked something to the effect “ if the first levee had not been built WOULD WE NEED THIS SECOND LEVEE?To which he answered "NO"

The proposal being discussed now with it’s raising of Dry Creek Road between Ascot and G St, the berms on the east side of Dry Creek Rd along with the proposed berms or ”Floodwall” on the west side of Rio Linda Airport has all the possibilities for us living east of Dry Creek Road to become a FORE BAY FOR WATER TO COLLECT IN AS IT BACKS UP FROM THE EAST LEVEE.... The water has no where to go once the east drainage canal is full and the new levee’s is stopping it from going south and west into Gardenland the original flood plane safety overflow area. The idea of getting the run off water out faster via the Robla Creek clean up along with the new box openings at Dry Creek Rd at C St and the bar ditch clean up on C St. and E Streets is all a positive step but does nothing to alleviate the problem that the people East of Dry Creek Road will face when the man made lake caused by the building of these two levee’s materializes....

I attended the Open House’s and Mitigation meetings that SAFCA put together where I was told not to worry as their computer flood model showed my water level would be lower in almost all cases of flood year events.Then on Feb 15th when the SAFCA Board members adopted the Robla Creek levee Project Supervisor Roger Dickinson offered to have SAFCA meet with me to see what can be done to flood proof our property.This offer was also made to the residents on C Street near Dry Creek Road. The offer would not have been made if trouble was not suspected.

I have given the SAFCA board a PETITION SIGNED BY OVER 500 CONCERNED CITIZEN’S to stop doing any further work on the raising of the south levee and building the floodwalls. These signatures came mostly from residents in the immediate effected areas. This in one way or another concerns all the residents of the Rio Linda Area.Will all this continue until all of us have a 5 ft berm and / or levee around all our properties.

Thank you

Ray Antonelli

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Rec Board Meeting, Friday 20 April
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:14:40 -0700
From: Raymond T Antonelli <raya6@juno.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

This is a copy of the letter given to the Newly appointed Reclamation Board members at the April 20, 2001 meeting so they can look into it prior to next months move by SAFCA to get their permit to continue on with their plan to flood us east of Dry Creek Road

Ray

The Reclamation Board April 20, 2001
1416 9th Street Room 1601
Sacramento, CA. 95814

Subject: Permit # 10633-A-BD, Robla Creek South Levee Project

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Reclamation Board:

Board members my name is Ray Antonelli and I live at 1240 "E" street in Rio Linda. I am a 60 year resident of Rio Linda and have been through the high waters that periodically inundate our community.. I have testified before the SAFCA board and attended the numerous mitigation meetings held by that agency to voice my opposition to the increased levee height and the building of “berms” (floodwalls) along the east side of Dry Creek Road and west of the Rio Linda Airport along the bike trail… I have had SAFCA people that have came to my house to try to assure me that I have no real problem and their computer generated flood model shows in fact I will be better off with this new water way.. Well as you can see I’m still not convinced.. The levee’s that are proposed around Rio Linda Airport , Bell Aqua lakes and the sub divisions of Bell Aqua and Western Acres puts me and my neighbors living east of Dry Creek Road in the middle of a poetical Wet Zone... The proposed levee height of 50 feet starting at G Street and dropping to approx 45 feet around the airport and lakes which SAFCA has stated was to protect Bell Aqua and Western Acres that have elevations of: Rio Linda Speedway is at 43.1 to 45.8 feet, elevation , Western Acres Which is at 44.1 to 50.6 feet elevation, Bell Aqua Ski Park Drive at 43.7 to 45.3 feet elevation, Bell Aqua Apartments at 42.1 to 43.4 feet , and the Boat Store at 44.5 feet all on the west side of Dry Creek Road...

Now on the east side of Dry Creek road we have: 4 or 5 Houses on C street with a 42.1 to 43.7 foot elevation; D. Bodenheimer 1226 E street 43.6 to 44.5, Our Property 1240 E Street 43.1 to 45.2 and the Singer Property 1255 E street is at 43.6 to 46.1 in elevation, they are all lower in elevation than the properties that SAFCA is protecting

On SAFCA’s map which shows Robla Creek joining the Magpie Diversion channel at Ascot at the high ground which in turn ties into the levee that was already built at a 42 foot elevation. This now leaves us in between two levees the new addition to the existing 42 levee to bring it up to 44.5 feet and the floodwalls built around the airport and ski lakes and down the east side of Dry Creek Road… JUST A GREAT PLACE TO BE …..

SAFCA’s proposal is protecting people that are on higher ground at the expense of the resident’s who live east of Dry Creek Road at lower elevations..

In conclusion I would like you to know that in the open SAFCA meeting of Feb.15, 2001 where the board of supervisors adopted the Robla Creek South Levee project Supervisor Roger Dickinson said on tape that he understood my concerns and if I would like SAFCA to meet with me and discuss a way to FLOOD-PROOF our property this would be possible.. That offer was also made to the residents on C Street which would lead you to believe, yes we have a problem.. I still would like to go on record as to do nothing more with the levee’s and reroute and clean Robla Creek..

Thank you

Ray Antonelli

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA Response 18 April 01
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 21:30:05 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

RL/E Net

The following is the answer from SAFCA. I have the original and it was scanned into a word doc and copied/pasted for this message.

It does not cover all the Questions I asked and the answers in this response are not acceptable by me.

Pete Ghelfi called me on April 18, Wednesday and said he was mailing me a copy of the SAFCA 500-year event floodmap. It is now 28 April, Saturday; 10 days and no map.

When I get the map I will be puting out more information.

Erwin Hayer

Following is the response from Pete Ghelfi:

SAFCA
    Sacramento
    Area Flood
    Control
    Agency

April 18, 2001

Erwin Hayer
950 G Street
Rio Linda, CA 95673

SUBJECT: ROBLA SOUTH LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS

I have received several copies of e-mails that have been sent to the Reclamation Board, Roger Dickinson's office and to Butch Hodgkins of SAFCA. I hope to answer the questions you have raised and if I missed a few questions raised, please let me know and I will respond. I have also attached the emails that I am responding to so if there is other correspondence that I am not aware of, please let me know. I have marked the areas to the questions I am responding in order to help keep track of the responses.

1. What was the frequency of the January 1995 storm event?

According to the County of Sacramento, the rainfall during the January 1995 storm event closely matched a 100-year rainfall event.

2. How can the FEMA 100 year floodplain be greater than the SAFCA 500 year floodplain?

There are a lot of factors that can influence the results in modeling the floodplain. Differences in the results can stem from the information input into the model to the type of model used. The main difference is that the FEMA model (which was created pre-1979) is a one-dimensional model (HEC-1). SAFCA and Sacramento County are using a two-dimensional model (FESWMS) that can better represent the split flow characteristics of Dry Creek.
The topography of the area can differ from when FEMA obtained the elevations in the area to the topography that SAFCA has used for its study purposes. FEMA's information was gathered from topography based on 5-foot contours from United States Geologic Surveys (USGS) that was conducted in the 1960s. The recent models are using 1-foot contour intervals from topography obtained in the 1990s.

There is also a difference in flows between the two models. A task force was developed to create a current hydrology model to reflect updated hydrology. It should be noted that the recent models have had a chance to be calibrated to past storm events such as 1986, 1995, and 1997. Also, as a final approach, slight variations in the modeler's assumptions into the model can also result in small differences from model to model. The current model has been reviewed by more than one engineering firm and has found this model the new model to be a good indicator of predicting water surface elevations for various storm events.
Results from various studies can differ. The table below is a comparison between the various studies that are available regarding floodplain elevations along Dry Creek:

Location on
the South                          SOURCE
Branch of
Dry Creek         FEMA        County (1)     County (2)     SAFCA (3)
(US side of
crossings)     100yr 500yr    100yr 500yr    100yr 500yr    100yr 500yr
-----------    ---- ----     ---- ----     ---- ----     ---- ----
Rio Linda Bl. 40.6 41.0     41.4 NA       42    NA       41.9 43.8
Bike Trail     45.0 45.5     44.0 NA       43    NA       43.3 44.6
G Street       46.5 47.0     46.0 NA       46    NA       45.8 46.6
Elkhorn Bl @   48.8 49.5     49.6 NA       50    NA       50.0 51.1
Dry Creek Rd (*)
Dry Creek Rd   51.5 53.0     53.4 NA       54    NA       53.2 54.6
Q Street       59.3 60.7     60.6 NA       62    NA       NA    NA
24th & U St    65.0 66.5     67.1 NA       68    NA       NA    NA
Elverta Rd.    70.0 72.0     72.9 NA       75    NA       NA    NA

(1) County study based on Corps Data -used to set floor elevations
       where greater than FEMA elevations
(2) County study to be submitted to FEMA to Revise FEMA floodplain
       maps. Numbers are approximated to the nearest foot.
(3) SAFCA study used for Robla Creek impacts, a deviation of the
       County (2) model. This model assumes 180,000 cfs in the
       American River.
(*) This location is near the intersection of the two roads and not
       the upstream face of Elkhorn Blvd. due to the drop in water
       surface elevations from east to west in this area.

3. The 1995 high-water mark measured on the south Branch of Dry Creek at Elkhorn Boulevard appears too low when compared to other data. How has this affected the models used for water surface calculations?

SAFCA has acknowledged that the high water mark from the 1995 storm is suspect. This number was obtained from Sacramento County Water Resources. Sacramento County survey crews obtained the information. In reviewing their survey notes, their math is correct. However, there is no way of going back and checking the high water mark they surveyed. How does it relate to affecting the model? High-water marks are typically used to help calibrate a model to see if the model is reasonably correct in predicting water surface elevations. If the model is not, then judgement is used to look at how the model can be adjusted to account for the observed high-water marks (or known water surface elevations based on timing). In checking with SAFCA's consultant that has developed our model, they indicate that the calibration run associated with the model predicted a water surface 0.6 feet higher than the high water mark that was "observed" at the Elkhorn location. This coincides with your observations. The modelers did not try to force the model to match the "observed" elevation but allowed the higher elevation to remain. If the high-water mark in the calibration run was 1-foot higher, would that have changed water surface elevations significantly? No, since the model is already predicting a higher water surface elevation that would match more closely with what you observed in the field.

4. Something is wrong with the model.

SAFCA believes that the model being used is a good representation of the floodplain on Dry Creek for the various storms being analyzed. There has been much discussion among the technical community on this model. It is agreed that an HEC-2 model (FEMA used this model back in the late 1970's) is not the best tool for modeling the split flow characteristics associated with Dry Creek. The technical community agrees that the model that SAFCA and Sacramento County are using is an appropriate tool for predicting the floodplain along Dry Creek. Is there something wrong with the model?

Several engineering firms in the area have reviewed the model and, at the request of the Reclamation Board, SAFCA funded an independent review by an engineer located in Southern California. There have been no representations by these reviewers that the model is wrong. The County model will be submitted for review to FEMA for mapping purposes.

5. Pete Ghelfi indicated that the Elkhorn Boulevard project lowered water surface elevations yet the EIR for the project states that the project is flood neutral with no increases/decreases upstream/downstream of the bridge.

Based on comparing the FEMA model and the SAFCA model, there is a "lowering" in the sense that SAFCA's water surface elevation is lower than FEMA's in the G Street area. The modeling that was developed for the Elkhorn Boulevard project was not based on the FEMA model but on a model very similar to the model being used by SAFCA. The model was created on behalf of Sacramento County by the engineering firm of Montgomery Watson. Sacramento County review (I didn't conduct the review if you are curious) showed that the project was neutral based on a comparison of pre-project and post-project conditions.

6. Since 1991, the County is using higher 100 year water surface elevations, which are 1.5 feet to 3.0 feet higher than FEMA's elevations.

Please see the table associated with the response to Question 2. The elevations are listed on column "County (1)". A comparison of "FEMA" and " County (1)" shows that is some cases that statement is true north of Elkhorn Blvd., but not in the area south of Elkhorn Blvd., which is the area of SAFCA's project.

7. What flood maps are SAFCA using to indicate the 500 year storm floodwater is lower than FEMA's 1989 flood maps?

This question is similar to Question 6 and the floodplain elevations are listed in the table shown in Question 2. Also, SAFCA is using current topography (based on 1-foot contours) to show the limits of the floodplain. FEMA delineation of the floodplain was based on rough estimates from USGS maps created in the 1960's using 5-foot contour intervals.

8. What water surface elevations was Pete Ghelfi using while at the County?

See provided table in Question 2. The County uses the numbers in "County (1)" for minimum finished floor elevation where they were higher than FEMA's numbers. "FEMA" is used for flood insurance purposes. "County (2)" may be used for both purposes once FEMA adopts the study.

9. How do 1 get a copy of any LOMRs for FIRM panel 060262- 0065E & F?

Sacramento County Water Resources keeps a copy of all LOMRs submitted through the County. Map revisions (LOMR) are submitted through the County unless a federal or state agency is making the application.

I would also like to make an attempt to answer the 7 questions that you have asked the Reclamation Board in your February 16 email to Ricardo Pineda.

Question 1 - Is SAFCA's permit 16033-A BD still valid? Yes, the permit is still valid. SAFCA must comply with the conditions in order to proceed with the next phase of work.

Question 2 - Has SAFCA met all of the conditions of Permit 16033 - A- BD? I understand that the Reclamation Board will respond to this question.

Question 3 - How can SAFCA Staff and Consultants justify a 500 year flood map that shows the floodwater lower than what it was in 1986 and 1995? SAFCA staff has plotted the best available information based on the accepted hydraulic model for Dry Creek on current topography for the area. This question is similar to Question 2 on page 1. Please refer to that response and keep in mind that different models can yield different results.

Question 4 - Have we had a 500 year flood on Dry Creek in the Rio Linda area? Since the time that the County has been keeping records, the largest storm recorded was the 1995 event, which had rainfall, approximating a 100-year storm event.

Question 5 - Has FEMA changed the flood maps in the Rio Linda area since 1989? FEMA has not made any major changes to the Dry Creek floodplain maps within the County since 1989. The City of Sacramento had a portion of Dry Creek remapped in 1992 and 1998. The County remapped a portion of the County north of the NEMDC pump station.

Question 6 - Do you know of any Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) being submitted to FEMA for the Rio Linda area? Sacramento County plans on making a LOMR submittal to FEMA in Spring 2001 for Dry Creek from the City Limits to the Placer County line. SAFCA is working with the City and County of Sacramento regarding a submittal to FEMA for the proposed work on Robla Creek.

Question 7 - Will SAFCA be required to have another hearing before the Reclamation Board prior to the start of construction on the Robla South Levee? I understand that the Reclamation Board will respond to this question.

Also, I would like to address a couple of items in your March 5 e-mail to Roger Dickinson. You again mention that something is wrong with someone's computer model and that it looks like there are three different flood maps for the Rio Linda area. While I was at the County, I noticed that there were several models on Dry Creek and that at times, floodplain elevations would not match. It was decided that between the City of Sacramento, the County of Sacramento, and SAFCA that one model should be adopted that can be used by all parties rather than each having their own model. The agreed to model will be County (2) model listed in the table. This model will be submitted sometime this spring to FEMA for review. It is our best available information. There will always be variations of this model depending on tailwater conditions, storm centering, channel roughness, and development within the watershed but it is an attempt to develop an accurate model for Dry Creek. All of the engineers that have worked on the model believe that it is the best tool to handle the hydraulic characteristics of the Dry Creek floodplain.

I hope this information has been helpful to the concerns you have raised in your various e-mails and again, if you have questions or I didn't answer a question, please feel free to contact me via email or by phone (874-8733).

Sincerely,

/s/

Pete Ghelfi
Director of Engineering

Office 916-874-7606
FAX 916-874-8289

1007 - 7th Street, 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814-3407

Cc:    Supervisor Roger Dickinson, 1st District
         Steve Bradley, The Reclamation Board
         Butch Hodgkins
         John Basset

Attachment
PG:C:\Documents and Settings\ghelfip\Desktop\hayer response.doc

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

Jump to the top of this page