NEWMAN – Economics may very well steer the Orestimba Creek flood control planning focus away from a foothills dam and toward downstream alternatives.

Local leaders were told during a meeting last week in Newman that an upstream dam, widely favored among West Siders as the ideal flood control solution for Orestimba Creek, will carry a price tag of about $85 million.

Most downstream flood control alternatives, which involve widening or cleaning the creek channel to improve flow, building a levee along Stuhr Road or a combination of both, are estimated to cost less than $20 million.

“I did not believe the costs were going to be as different as they were,” said City Manager Michael Holland. “Just from a sheer dollar perspective the dry dam alternative is not encouraging. I believe the economics will make it infeasible.”

One new option under consideration is the combination of a levee along Stuhr Road with a bypass channel carrying floodwater to the San Joaquin River instead of allowing it to back up behind the levee, and modifications to increase the capacity of the creek channel.

Local officials were adamant that no flood control project which protects the city of Newman at the expense of farmers would be acceptable.

The hybrid combination of solutions would offer increased flood control protection to both - unlike a Stuhr Road levee alone, which remained among the alternatives under review by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Based on initial Army Corps’ calculations, the levee alone would produce the highest benefit-cost ratio of the alternatives still on the table.

Critics charged that the levee cost was far underestimated, and that a levee without other improvements would create more ag land flooding while protecting the city.

“We strongly object to the short levee by itself, said David Jones, Director of Communications and Legislative Affairs for Stanislaus County. “The goal is to protect both the urban and the ag areas of the county. The problem with the short levee (by itself) is that it floods farmers.”

DeeDee D’Adamo, senior policy advisor to Congressman Dennis Cardoza, adamantly agreed.

“We had a guiding principle in the project not to induce flooding,” she stated. “When you put together your ratio, how do you include that factor? I would think (the levee) would be an alternative that would almost automatically come off (the list of alternatives).”

The community, D’Adamo stressed, would never accept that alternative.

Removing the option is easier said than done, said Army Corps staff members who explained that they were bound to explore all viable alternatives.

“We are looking at things in increments to make sure they are justified, and that there is good benefit to spending federal dollars,” said Army Corps staff member Sara Schultz, a lead planner on the project.

Any project must ultimately have the approval of the local community, but the level of federal funding support is based on the Army Corps’ selected alternative and benefit-cost estimates – another reason local representatives urged that the levee alone not be given further consideration.

If, for example, the Corps’ identified a $5 million project (its estimate for the Stuhr Road levee) as its preferred alternative, that would essentially cap the federal funding at two-thirds of that amount or $3.3 million.

The community could still pursue, say, a $20 million flood control project – or even the dry dam  if it chose – but the federal amount would remain unchanged.

Matt Machado, the county’s director of public works, said he believes revisions to the levee alternative cost estimates will drastically change its benefit-cost ratio.

“If we fix these numbers, I think that option will fall off the board and the levee alone will no longer be an option,” said Machado.

“This is our first cut at numbers, and they will change,” Schultz commented.

The Army Corps will also look into another possibility for removing the levee-only option from consideration. The levee alone would not be allowed if it would create additional flooding of lands that are in the national flood insurange program, they noted.

The Army Corps representatives agreed to recalculate the levee alternative costs, and to add a hybrid project for consideration which combines a levee with improvements to the creek channel and the bypass channel.

The upstream dry dam will also stay on the board for now despite costs that appear prohibitive.

“We still need that comparison so the community can make a decision,” D’Adamo said.

Machado said he believes the hybrid combination of levee, bypass channel and creek modifications will ultimately produce a very  favorable benefit-cost ratio.

He conceded, though, that the solution is not perfect.

“You might still be paying for a $20 million project, but would still anticpate some flooding for the ag folks (in a major storm),” Machado said. “That’s the pain.”

Newman officials have another consideration as well. They have opposed any sort of levee system because it would hem in the city’s option to grow north past Stuhr Road.

“It is going to be something we have to evaluate,” Holland commented.

Supervisor Jim DeMartini said he agrees the downstream hybrid may prove most feasible.

“The combination of those looks like it might be the best option right now,” he commented. “Everybody prefers the upstream detention dam, but that doesn’t look promising due to the economics. That $86 million price tag (for a dam) is what gets everybody’s attention.”

The normally tame Orestimba Creek floods after major winter storms, fed by a large watershed in the foothills.

Farmers bear the brunt of the flooding most frequently, but Newman has also flooded on several occasions as well, most recently in 1995 and 1998.