I wonder what the cost would be to remove the levee and what the increase in value of the land would be after the levee is removed. Also what would happen to the homes that are built on the river side of the levee between 13th and 15th streets.

RM1, Could be that you are right. However, there is a lot of dirt to be removed. As a side note, I lived in a house on lower Broad for a short period of time during the thirties before my family decided to move back to the farm. One spring we had to vacate because of flooding. The water was backing up from east of Augusta below where the levee ended. There was about two feet of water in the middle of Broad.

RM1 That is right. The dam was built in the early fifties. My comment, as I said, was a side note.

As far as tearing it down, I went as far as looking at the section between 13th and the Marriott and estimating the yardage of dirt that would need to be moved and what it might cost based on a friend who is in the dirt moving business. I don't recall now what his guesstimate was, but it really wasn't that bad. There is probably some good dirt in there that could be sold too. I guess one of the major costs is finding a place to put it all that isn't too far for trucks to go.

Vito45, I am sure that you are right. I have no knowledge or do I want any knowledge on this matter. My poor brain is already loaded with stuff that I have learned over the last 87 years most of which is of no value. On top of that my home is at a safe 350 feet above sea level.

If my memory serves me right the city cannot remove the levee without the corps permission. Knowing the corp as well as I do it may time several lifetimes to get that permission.

Scooby, the Corps also said without us paying $400 grand for the levee inspection we couldn't keep it. Heh...okay.

Avid, read previous posts. Dam break would flood downtown, and the levee would create a slow draining bowl. No wall of water though, too much land for it to drain into before getting downtown.

That is pretty dramatic when the water is going out at the top of the dam. I saw that about ten years ago, too. But if all the water from top to bottom behind the dam came out at once, THAT would be something much more dramatic.

Fundamental, the talk of removing only applies to the undeveloped portions. It would really enhance the ability to continue developing the riverfront, all the way down to Sand Bar Ferry with high end residential and commercial.

Didn't the city have to place the timbers in the levee breaks during the flood of 1991?

avidreader "what if the dam breaks" :would there be secondary insurance consequences if the levee were to be removed re: thurmond lake dam burst scenario? were the levee to be removed, would the downtown flood plain be altered were the dam to burst and would this not possibly raise flood insurance rates in the possibly affected area? the dam burst scenario has been written about in this newspaper.

Okay, Scooby. If Dr. Swift is talking of removing the levee only south of 5th Street, then I guess the next step is to take Brad Owens' advice and "follow the money." Who owns the land west of the levee and south of 5th Street?