Hi,
We are planning on moving to the Tulsa area, I have noticed that there are a lot of flooding going on over there!! Is that normal? Or unusual. I also wanted to get some info from locals on which towns would be a good choice to settle into. We want something no too big or too small, but something that has a lot of growth potential.
Thanks,
Grace
There hasn't been much flooding in Tulsa, but some of our suburbs are having issues with it.
This is an abnormally rainy season for us, and not something I am too worried about.
Hi graceinwa.
Tulsa instituted a stormwater management plan after flooding in 1984 and we have what I would say is a model program. You might get localized street flooding during very heavy rains, but it's rare to have a flood in the city limits anymore.
Do you already have jobs lined up in Tulsa? That might determine where you want to live and how far you want to commute.
All the suburban towns in the Tulsa area are growing. Other towns to look into are Jenks, Bixby, Broken Arrow, Claremore, Glenpool, and Owasso.
Have you visited the area yet?
I have only in Tulsa for 4 years, for full disclosure...
But in my experience this much water is very unusual. In fact, looking at the national weather service it is very unusual. We are getting more rain this year than we have at any time in the last 20.
and the good news, is that there is no flooding in the Tulsa metro area. The areas that are really getting hurt by the flooding are rural areas that can not afford the flood control protections that Tulsa has put in place. The only 'flooding' that you are likely to see in Tulsa is some swamped streets and a soggy yard for an hour after a down poor a few times a month in the spring (my backyard is a bowl, so I wish it was soggy for only an hour... but in general).
So no. Flooding is not a great concern in Tulsa. Even in this unusual year the flooding in the NE Oklahoma has had to real effect on my life (other than fewer boat ramps at the lakes).
In my opinion, "We want something no too big or too small, but something that has a lot of growth potential" rules out Owasso and Broken Arrow. Sure, they could still grow a ton, but what I'm getting is that you want a small town feel without being stuck in a dead-end small town??
Skiatook (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skiatook,_Oklahoma%22) is a good choice. It's only ~15 minutes from downtown Tulsa, has good schools, steady growth and tons of growth potential, the small-town atmosphere, complete with a historic downtown main street. Another bonus is Skiatook Lake (//%22http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=skiatook%20lake&w=97355281%40N00%22), one of the cleanest lakes in Oklahoma, and the site of the new CrossTimbers Resort (//%22http://www.crosstimbersok.com%22) (yet-to-be-completed). Land values are pretty low for the area, which is good if you plan on building.
Glad to have you coming into the area Grace and company. Like stated above, there really hasn't been any threat of flooding in the Tulsa Metro. I live very close to the river and we've not had any issues in our neighborhood or in the surrounding downtown/midtown area.
Both downtown/midtown would be my suggestion to move into as there is a lot of beauty of the non-anthill type homes with big older trees, riverpark trails, lots of green space, eclectic businesses and such. I'm sure you'll love our city once you get here and explore. Best wishes on your move!
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
...I would say is a model program...
You are correct in saying so, Conan. Tulsa's stormwater management program leads the nation and Tulsa has the lowest flood insurance rates in the country.
quote:
Originally posted by graceinwa
.....something no too big or too small, but something that has a lot of growth potential.
Check out west and southwest Tulsa. You can find some real gems west of the river -- more for your money and it's an area, I believe, that is on its way up! Also, the flood control in the area is great. I haven't even seen any street flooding in the area during this heavy rain.
Good luck!
If you are thinking of a place right next door to Tulsa, I would stick with Jenks. Bixby might be TOO small, but in the last couple of years it has stepped in its growth.
Skiatook is a good suggestion, if you don't mind a little bit of a drive (really, it wouldn't be any worse than living in any other suburb of Tulsa).
I love the midtown/oldtown area but you may not find your most rapid value growth there. But we never concern ourselves with flooding as it is gently rolling hills.
I spend most of my working day in the far southeast area, 91st-111th from sheridan to Mingo. Most Tulsan's love the area but it is flat and the streets and yards tend to hold water. Its like the developers have no idea how to direct the water to existing creeks.
Even so its just temporary and seasonal.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaMINI
quote:
Originally posted by graceinwa
.....something no too big or too small, but something that has a lot of growth potential.
Check out west and southwest Tulsa. You can find some real gems west of the river -- more for your money and it's an area, I believe, that is on its way up! Also, the flood control in the area is great. I haven't even seen any street flooding in the area during this heavy rain.
Good luck!
I'm with you I like west Tulsa too. Old time charm- old time flavor. Also SandSprings is nice and they have a jogging trail there. Sapulpa is nice too. A city I like alot is Omaha, Nebraska they have a strong economy, great stores and no sales tax on food items, and Omaha has a great system of jogging/bike trails. Omaha has cold winters though.[B)]
Thank you so much you have all been so helpful. We are planning a trip out there in late September I will take all your advice and check it out. We don't have jobs lined up we would like to to start a contracting business and possibly other businesses that's why we want growth potential.
Grace
CL quoted:
Originally posted by Conan71
...I would say is a model program...
You are correct in saying so, Conan. Tulsa's stormwater management program leads the nation and Tulsa has the lowest flood insurance rates in the country.
_______________________________________
Being curious as our SWM program leads the nation and quoted as #1 in runoff control. I understand Denver tried but gave it up. Is there someone that has knowledge of some other city that is trying it.
The city has not received the rain fall in short periods as in the '60's, '74, '76, '84, '86 or 89. Most of the suburbs cited flood quite often. Flood insurance cost is about one third of the cost paid for homeowners insurance.
I have in hand a book published April 30, 1984 authorized by US public works which shows the recommended flood controls. Thirty days later 14 deaths occurred in flooding in Tulsa. The city did not follow the recommendations outlined in the book. Somewhere I have seen a chart citing the city as the most flooded in the nation.
It is a beautiful city and if one comes to make a home be sure it is on high grounds not like the FEMA official said "Not even a farmer builds in the creek bed".
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
CL quoted:
Originally posted by Conan71
...I would say is a model program...
You are correct in saying so, Conan. Tulsa's stormwater management program leads the nation and Tulsa has the lowest flood insurance rates in the country.
_______________________________________
Being curious as our SWM program leads the nation and quoted as #1 in runoff control. I understand Denver tried but gave it up. Is there someone that has knowledge of some other city that is trying it.
The city has not received the rain fall in short periods as in the '60's, '74, '76, '84, '86 or 89. Most of the suburbs cited flood quite often. Flood insurance cost is about one third of the cost paid for homeowners insurance.
I have in hand a book published April 30, 1984 authorized by US public works which shows the recommended flood controls. Thirty days later 14 deaths occurred in flooding in Tulsa. The city did not follow the recommendations outlined in the book. Somewhere I have seen a chart citing the city as the most flooded in the nation.
It is a beautiful city and if one comes to make a home be sure it is on high grounds not like the FEMA official said "Not even a farmer builds in the creek bed".
So are you suggesting, that when they published that book of recommended flood controls in 1984, they had enough time to implement those flood controls in the 30 days before the flood happened?
As for that "Most flooded in the nation" chart. Just how old is it?
quote:
Originally posted by graceinwa
Thank you so much you have all been so helpful. We are planning a trip out there in late September I will take all your advice and check it out. We don't have jobs lined up we would like to to start a contracting business and possibly other businesses that's why we want growth potential.
Grace
No fear about not finding a job, The Tulsa Sunday paper is full of job ads. (The news paper can read on-line) The local temp services are begging for workers. The housing market is affordable too. prop. taxes are lower than in Omaha. Arriving in late Sept. it can get a bit nippy though. Falls can be nice in Tulsa, but it does get darn cold at night. That reminds me of an old 1971 song called "Maggie Mae" The lyrics are something like "It's late Sept. and I really should be back in school..."
Shadows just hates city workers and has been complaining about Tulsa's stormwater program since the 1970s.
The facts say something different. Tulsa leaders invested in stormwater management after a number of terrible flood events and convinced the federal government to match the dollars almost 20 to 1.
Tulsa's program is now regularly called the best in the country and the national flood insurance program gives Tulsa residents the lowest flood insurance rates in the country.
And yes, shadows, other cities still have stormwater programs. In fact, most do. It is part of the responsibility of keeping a city safe.
Recycle quoted:
so are you suggesting, that when they published that book of recommended flood controls in 1984, they had enough time to implement those flood controls in the 30 days before the flood happened?
As for that "Most flooded in the nation" chart. Just how old is it?
*****************************************
Most of the flood control frog ponds were in place in the '84 having already been constructed by the engineers of one of Tulsa outstanding firms. The drainage system stops into a concrete low water dam a half mile north of Pine Street some four miles short of exiting into Bird Creek.
The article on the most flooded cities is filed with much information and pictures that is not readily available at this time.
******************************************
Recycle quoted:
And yes, shadows, other cities still have stormwater programs. In fact, most do. It is part of the responsibility of keeping a city safe.
****************************************
Could you cite those cities where the frog pond concept of flood control has been installed?
Ask Charles or Mike if the city is safe if a flood of the '84 magnitude happened today.
How many is enough to convince you?
Minneapolis
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/stormwater/fee/Stormwater_FAQ.asp
http://www.charlestoncounty.org/index2.asp?p=/departments/PublicWorks/StormwaterFee.htm
http://www.florida-stormwater.org/manual/chapter5/5-2.html
http://projects.ch2m.com/semswa/fees.htm
http://www.co.dekalb.ga.us/stormwater/index.html
Kansas City
http://www.kcmo.org/water.nsf/web/swordinances?opendocument
Louisville
http://www.ci.louisville.co.us/PublicWorks/stormwater.htm
http://www.takomaparkmd.gov/publicworks/stormwater.html
http://www.moline.il.us/departments/public_works/stormwater_utility.asp
San Antonio
http://www.saws.org/service/rates/stormwater_fee.shtml
QuoteOriginally posted by shadows
*************
Most of the flood control frog ponds were in place in the '84 having already been constructed by the engineers of one of Tulsa outstanding firms. Quote
Most of the flood control areas I have seen were built after 84. I found this old report from the early 1990's. It mentions that many projects wont be finished until 1996 and I know that there have been many more done after that. Heck they just finished one in the pearl district this year with 2 more larger retention ponds to be built later. I know that those soccer fields off of 169 (they are for flood control) are later than the 80s. And there are others like that around town even newer.
http://www.smartcommunities.ncat.org/pubs/harmsway/overview.shtml
http://www.smartcommunities.ncat.org/pubs/harmsway/garden.shtml
http://www.smartcommunities.ncat.org/pubs/harmsway/concl.shtml
Add Waterloo, Iowa to the list of cities that use that method of flood control.
- - -
To be sure no city is 'flood proof.' But Tulsa has done a good enough job that it isnt a real threat. Las Vegas could flood too, but it just isnt that likely.
Shadow, since you usually just lie about things instead of looking them up; I would like to see data that supports your "we haven't gotten as much rain" claim.
It seems funny to me that before the flood control measures were put in place we got so much rain every 3 or 4 years that the city flooded... after the flood control we haven't had that much rain for a couple of decades. I call bologna.
After reading through the postings on the flooding on the flooding in Tulsa it seems that we are talk about different things. The question was what other cities are using the frog pond concept to controlling thousands of acre feet of water that is primary in the Mingo basin of 61 square miles.
Yes Virginia there is a Santa Clause. The cities were given federal aid to create more bureaucrats to insure that the contaminated flood waters were processed before exiting them into the main streams. [Tulsa has that problem with part of its water supply]
Certain area's before being developed were noted for its floods already. As the developments were made in those basin there was an increase from the increase of the impervious areas that added to the inflow into the basin over eight times the nature designated out flow.
They dug a 65 acre Pork Chop detention pond and the dirt was deposited in the downstream flood way thus the retention value of the frog pond was zero.
As one can read the Tulsa answer suggest that the flood control design was for a 1% yearly flood but that due to the geographical location of the city floods of greater magnitude could be expected.
Tulsa does not have a dust storm each year, nor a tornado in December nor rainfall great enough to spawn a major flood but the flood of '84 was on the chance of 20% of rain fall.
The resent filling of the Mingo floodway has decreased its outflow capacity by possible 50%.
The greatest improvement to positive flood control has been the removal of the building in the flood plain with the insurance money paid for by the owners of the buildings.
Being one sitting on the razors edge in the city of birth, taking the side of the working poor, with 20,000 to 50,000 Immigrants, [city hall can't determine how many] where there is two or three or more shooting each week, I am accused of lying for pointing out the inequities of a small city wanting to be a big city.
All the directives posted of other cities that are goanna use the federal money to develop a flood control system seems to be eaten up by the desk jockeys before the flood control begins.
The question still remains "what other cities have used the frog pond concept to retain the flood waters? We are #1?
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Shadow, since you usually just lie about things instead of looking them up; I would like to see data that supports your "we haven't gotten as much rain" claim.
It seems funny to me that before the flood control measures were put in place we got so much rain every 3 or 4 years that the city flooded... after the flood control we haven't had that much rain for a couple of decades. I call bologna.
You ignored my question.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
The resent filling of the Mingo floodway has decreased its outflow capacity by possible 50%.
Ignoring the spelling, I think math skills are also not one of your strengths.
Do you have any of them numbers used to make such a statement available to share with us?
quote:
Originally posted by graceinwa
Thank you so much you have all been so helpful. We are planning a trip out there in late September I will take all your advice and check it out. We don't have jobs lined up we would like to to start a contracting business and possibly other businesses that's why we want growth potential.
Grace
A EXCELLENT website for job searches:
Indeed.com (//%22www.indeed.com%22)
Good luck!
The suggestion that "we haven't gotten as much rain" in recent decades is wrong.
Check out the graphic with this archived article. It shows that Oklahoma has been above average in rainfall since the early 1980s.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=060226_Ne_A21_Oklah12372
Thanks for the link rwarn:
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2006/060226_A21_Oklah12372_a21dustgr.jpg)
Apparently Shadow, you're wrong again. Unless you can find data that indicates we got more heavy rainfall in brief periods before the flood control measures and then it stopped...
Didn't the weather bureau measure .25 inches of rainfall recently while the gages in south Tulsa registered 2.5 inches of rainfall.
The weather bureau can give one the data on rainfall in the Tulsa Area but there is a great difference to the rainfall in the Mingo Basin and the State of Oklahoma.
A thunder storm can form and dissipate over a small area as well as a cluster of thunder storms can form over a large area leaving a path of heavy rainfall.
Apparently CP cannot read the charts he wants to post. Look up the charts on the CCC of the dry cycle in the '30's. Read of the way the government stepped out to cover the soil and retain the rain water that fell along with wind breaks in the article.
The rainfall cycles seem to be two decades in completion.
Remember the small thunder storm that formed over 15th and Memorial that's down flow wipe out the church building.
We are fortunate to have an ordinance that stops the storms that form to the west from entering the Tulsa city limits. We can not stop the immigrants so at any time a storm might get through.
(http://k41.pbase.com/o4/75/47975/1/61089116.TheDeepEnd_35169.jpg)
Recycle; I have pictures of before and after along with video tapes and copies of the pictures that Wolfe took from the chopper in the morning of the '84 flood. Go to the bridge over the Mingo at Pine and look both ways then it is self evident it has been fill in during the dry cycle we may be just leaving. Take a $1 dollar computer and feed into it the amount of acre feet that is produced in a 3 inch rainfall in three hours, less frog pond storage, compute the speed of the flow from the HEC reports of the corps, the capacity of the filled in flood way, then you can see if my math is wrong.
Wow, we are all being such great ambassadors for the city of Tulsa. [}:)]
Short answer: no we have not had any serious flooding other than occasional street flooding since the Memorial Day 1984 flood and when we had the Arkansas River flood of 1986.
Our recent rains have proven that the USACE has put into place better flood management techniques on their controlled water ways since the '86 flood.
I believe anything still pointing to Tulsa as being "most flooded" city would be pretty out of date.
www.tulsalibrary.org/govdocs/floods.HTM
I do not read where they suggest to dropping the flood insurance
Hellooooo! It's been reported that Tulsa has among the lowest flood insurance RATES in the nation.
That doesn't mean you should take your chances without flood insurance if you live on a floodplain. No one in his right mind advocates that.
Shadows, first you get caught in a falsehood about rainfall. Then you try to be misleading in the facts. Cut it out.
See http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=8679 for 2000 FEMA press release wherein it is stated "because of the city's efforts, beginning next month Tulsa property owners will enjoy the lowest flood insurance rates in the country."
Having paid flood insurance since 1977 I have not seen such decrease in premiums that is suggested.
Having bought property that the Highway department assured me that the section of roadway to the bomber plant was above the floodway when built in 40's. Their engineering sheets were turned over to the city when annexed and seems the engineering sheets have disappeared.
The flood of '84 dumped 14 inches of rain fall in a short time. Convert that to acre feet over 61 square miles and get from SWM the total that can be stored in the frog ponds. The water enters into the basin more than eight times the exit speed.
Since the first work on the Mingo flood control begin the depth of the flood waters have increased. More of the floodway has been filled restricting the flow downstream.
It is easy to draw it on paper but when one stands in water that increased to one inch above four drawer file cabinets it is hard to see where flood controls are working.
Not sure what shadows is talking about at all in this thread. The present day Mingo Creek Flood Control project is a result of Congressional authorization in the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. The city did some work on its own before that date, but it was't until after 86 that the majority of the project was implemented. The total project, built in various phases, wasn't complete until 2001 and included 19 separate contracts. There is absolutely no question that the project has had an enormous impact in eliminating and/or reducing flooding that previously occurred in its watershed.
BixB wrote:
Not sure what shadows is talking about at all in this thread.
<end clip>
You could put that on shadows' tombstone. [}:)]
I grew up living in the Mingo Creek flood control basin at about 3rd and Mingo. I live there now, and can tell you when I was about 8 or 9 (mid 70s) that the Mingo Creek flowing the mile from Admiral to 11th was a mess. Narrow and heavily wooded.
Before the grading and widening of the creek began, I can remember even before the 84 flood having some floods that were scary. I can remember hopping in the truck with my father and driving down by Eastwood Church on 11th street just to look at the bridge and see how high the water was. Many, many times that water would be less than 6 feet from the bottom of the bridge.
With the new flood controls in place, during the heaviest rains I can ever remember, the most I've ever seen it rise is about halfway from the creek bed. I'd say that's some progress.
You can cite numbers all you like. I lived the 84 flood. Our house missed flooding by 1/2 of an inch, and only because ours was one of two houses that sat on a higher porch. I can remember the following weekend it rained again, and hearing the alternating high-low of the civil defense sirens signifying flood.
Guess what...I've never heard that siren again. I'd say we do have a model system in town.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
Having paid flood insurance since 1977 I have not seen such decrease in premiums that is suggested.
Having bought property that the Highway department assured me that the section of roadway to the bomber plant was above the floodway when built in 40's. Their engineering sheets were turned over to the city when annexed and seems the engineering sheets have disappeared.
The flood of '84 dumped 14 inches of rain fall in a short time. Convert that to acre feet over 61 square miles and get from SWM the total that can be stored in the frog ponds. The water enters into the basin more than eight times the exit speed.
Since the first work on the Mingo flood control begin the depth of the flood waters have increased. More of the floodway has been filled restricting the flow downstream.
It is easy to draw it on paper but when one stands in water that increased to one inch above four drawer file cabinets it is hard to see where flood controls are working.
You may not have seen the decreases because your house wasn't designated as being in the flood plain. If it is, you are mandated by federal statute to carry insurance, or at least that's the way it was when the square mile I grew up in was considered flood plain.
My parents were paying, right before the flood, about $1000 dollars a year for flood insurance alone because their regular home insurance carrier wouldn't bond flood insurance. Now, the regular home insurance covers the flood insurance, and we're paying about 600 dollars a year in 07 for all coverages, not just flood insurance. Big difference.
You must be designated in the flood plain before you can see the difference
OK you lose me on this insurance. I am told that Hartford underwrites high risk policies on flood insurance which is subsided by the government. The homeowner polices I carry cover interior flooding caused by leaking interior plumbing not acts of God nor nature.
Shadow's, no matter what kind of work the City of Tulsa does on its flood control measures; it will not effect the rate of your insurance for "flooding" caused by plumbing. It is, in no way, the domain of the city to diminish flooding in your home caused by your home.
At the present time I am paying $340 flood insurance through Hartford and $850 homeowners insurance to Republic on my residence in a undefined flood area.
I have property in the designated flood area that I pay only for flood insurance through Hartford. I have property on high ground that I pay homeowners on only.
The water ran over the Pork Chop retention and flooded the intersection at 11&Mingo as well as the school and church on 11th in the 84 flood. The water ran so fast through the 144 overpass a boat could not be controlled. Since that time ever square foot of concrete and buildings add in the 61 sq miles change the impervious areas which also changes cubic feet of space that is needed in the retention ponds. No one will tell one that it cannot happen again.
Sure is nice to have some one straiten me out on what happened. Lol [:D][:D]
The city has also built additional detention areas upstream since 1984. Your home is now safer from a flood than it was 23 years ago.
I also realize nothing I, nor any amount of hydrologists, can say to convince you we are right.
Recycle:
Are you a hydrologist?
When I first got involved in this we tried to find a school of Hydrology. Since; some schools have added hours in their curriculum. The facts on flooding have changed since this morning. Like the old cliché of meteorology. "Using the best way to predict the weather is look out the window." The dikes on the Mississippi as well as those in New Orleans caused the river to rise and when the water breached them the flooding was increased to new depts.
The figures on how many acre feet can be stored in the detention ponds seem to be an elusive number. Go to the railroad bridge a half mile north of pine and you will see that all that fancy channel ends there and with little effort one could have jump across the Mingo Creek the last time I look at it. The last I heard was Owasso said if you send that water on us we'll sue you. We have a federal code called the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. The interpretation of this act is written on the back of the IRS code of instructions I believe.
When I was a child our family went on overnight fishing trips, camping out on the banks of the Mingo. Where? Where 21st now goes over the Mingo.
Has anyone noticed how Shadows lives in the past? It was this way in such a such a year, so its that way now. Its as if he learns something once, then everything after that doesn't happen, doesn't mattter or exist. Unless it fits his hypothesis based on how it was. lol
You're far too generous, Artist.
Shadows is simply being dishonest to promote his ill-conceived agenda.
Naw; shadows lives and reacts in the real world not a world of fancies.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
Recycle:
Are you a hydrologist?
The figures on how many acre feet can be stored in the detention ponds seem to be an elusive number. Go to the railroad bridge a half mile north of pine and you will see that all that fancy channel ends there and with little effort one could have jump across the Mingo Creek the last time I look at it. The last I heard was Owasso said if you send that water on us we'll sue you.
Now, I'm not a hydrologist either, but, Mingo Creek certainly does not flow NORTH to Owasso out of Tulsa.