Cedar Rapids flooding

ISUAlum05

Active Member
Nov 5, 2007
631
46
28
Cedar Rapids, IA
Prior to that storm at six, very little rain in the locality. Yet the river was already predicted to crest at 24 feet in a few days. Its not lack of planning in CR. Its an unusual amount of rain happening hundreds of miles to the north, and then improper river management from Waterloo north. That big basin in Waterloo is easily overpowered unless it is left to drain PRIOR to any event. This probably means keeping the level lower in Waterloo, which will make all of those lakes around George Wythe Park less attractive recreation destinations.

Until this is corrected, rains in North Iowa and Waterloo will be the reason why the Cedar floods.
So you think there should be no recreational areas?
 

cc1091

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2007
1,146
305
83
Minneapolis
... but there are no flood control reservoirs upstream of CR .

We are talking about water management right?

The 2010 Iowa River Dam Inventory calls the dam at Cedar Rapids a 'low-head' dam. Yet it is one of the most unusual low head dams I've ever seen. It has gates which open or close depending on the water flow. Odd that those gates have been open most of the summer. Heck, if Waterloo doesn't have something similar to control that 70+ feet of water depth at George Wythe park, then I just don't know. Perhaps there SHOULD be more flood control gates along the Cedar?

But what am I complaining about? A 2010 survey that has obviously been out of date since plans were made for Interstate 380 to pass over the dam at Cedar Rapids? That seems far less a complaint than Congress passing authorization for work on flood control along the Cedar and yet allocating NO funds for such work (thank you Chuck Grassley and Republicans). And when few funds are allocated for post flood rebuilding along the Cedar, it must first pass through DSM where large buckets are dipped into that pile of cash and diverted to who knows where. No, a lot more in Iowa needs the kind of management that our rivers and streams should be getting, but it won't come as long as it has to pass through political bodies.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: aauummm

BoxsterCy

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 14, 2009
43,999
40,712
113
Minnesota
That the congress has approved the building of a better flood retention system in Cedar Rapids is significant. That congress has also not provided any funding for that system is also significant. Look to the leadership provided by Chuck Grassley (I'm kidding, there was no leadership provided by him, his latest words implied that we should give up on getting funds to help support the building of this system).

All it takes for catastrophes to happen, is for good men to fail to do what they know is right.

Grassley is being realistic although I usually disagree with about everything that comes out of his mouth.

Problem is that congress has authorized something like $60 billion in Corps projects for design and construction. The Corps annual budget is approximately $4 billion of which around $ 1 billion is for actual design/construction. Even if you cut the backlog in half by deauthorizing and deleting older unfunded projects the backlog will remain HUGE and never be completed without a total stop to adding new projects or an enormous increase in the Corps budget, neither of which is going to happen. The politicians decided earmarks were something to disdain and took away a piece of their own "power of the purse" (not like any Iowa members have any clout in appropriations anyway).

Congress has included some hollow language in an introduced authorization bill directing the Corps to "expedite" the project but it's non-binding feel good language in a water resources development act that is unlikely to pass anyway. A project with a weak benefit/cost ratio that was only authorized in 2014 is not going to leapfrog other national projects authorized prior to it with better return on the dollar. The Corps annual budget proposal and the President's subsequent proposal to Congress is going to prioritized funding to complete projects already underway over starting another new project. Congress doesn't have the stomach to project specific funding direction in an actual appropriation bill which would be binding. Haven't seen that done for a midwestern project since Rep. Oberstar was a power in appropriations.

If CR is going to get built it's likely to be done without much federal financial support. Even as proposed the project is more local/state then federal since the fed project authorized is only a piece of what the locals want, something like 10-15% or so.

/end long mini op-ed by former Corps project manager o_O
 

BoxsterCy

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 14, 2009
43,999
40,712
113
Minnesota
We are talking about water management right?

The 2010 Iowa River Dam Inventory calls the dam at Cedar Rapids a 'low-head' dam. Yet it is one of the most unusual low head dams I've ever seen. It has gates which open or close depending on the water flow. Odd that those gates have been open most of the summer. Heck, if Waterloo doesn't have something similar to control that 70+ feet of water depth at George Wythe park, then I just don't know. Perhaps there SHOULD be more flood control gates along the Cedar?

But what am I complaining about? A 2010 survey that has obviously been out of date since plans were made for Interstate 380 to pass over the dam at Cedar Rapids? That seems far less a complaint than Congress passing authorization for work on flood control along the Cedar and yet allocating NO funds for such work (thank you Chuck Grassley and Republicans). And when few funds are allocated for post flood rebuilding along the Cedar, it must first pass through DSM where large buckets are dipped into that pile of cash and diverted to who knows where. No, a lot more in Iowa needs the kind of management that our rivers and streams should be getting, but it won't come as long as it has to pass through political bodies.

Seriously, as far as river hydraulics and watershed hydrology you have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about.
 

ArgentCy

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2010
20,387
11,176
113
Send that rain to SE Iowa. We've barely had a drop. Very unusual setup for September. It's just not going anywhere and it keeps forming in the same areas. Good luck to everyone in the area.
 

cy4life94

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 26, 2012
594
266
63
Cedar Rapids
Well, moved into an apartment downtown about a month ago. Looks like I'll be without a place for a while.
 

cyfanatic

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
6,572
2,535
113
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Driving into work today (from SW side into CR) I was surprised at how full the streams were...a few well out of their banks! All ditches were full...the rain didn't get my attention overnight...maybe because of the non-stop lightning! The lightning displays all night were impressive! As for the flooding...ugh...no fun at all!
 

chuckd4735

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 29, 2006
28,864
10,634
113
40
Indianola
Doesn't look like they are increasing the predictions for CR. I think the good thing last night is that different areas of the watershed were hit last night than the night before. The rain event from last night jumped the river about 2 feet, but its already going back down, and the rain from Wednesday night looks to arrive in CR midday tomorrow. Hopefully everything that hit last night/this morning is able to get out of town before Wednesday nights rain shows up.
 

somecyguy

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2006
3,221
3,581
113
I'm over the far SE side and it's been raining almost constantly since overnight. We've gotten a little over 2" so far. Indian creek by 29th st dr was high, but I've seen it worse.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron