Laserfiche WebLink
<br />!I <br />I I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />\1 <br />II <br />II <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />'I <br />I <br />II <br />II <br /> <br />100-year event. The first peak of Figure 7 is the flow <br />generated from the urbanized area. <br /> <br />The most significant difference between this analysis and that <br /> <br />of the Flood Insurance Study is the difference in flood peaks <br /> <br />into Douglas Reservoir. The SWMM model shows a peak of 4,200-cfs, <br /> <br />about 60% of the 7,500-cfs reported in the previous report. <br /> <br />The SWMM model would seem to be supported by history in that the <br /> <br />FIA calculations show the reservoir very close to overtopping <br />during the 100-year event. The dam has been in place for 70 <br /> <br />years without evidence of an extremely large outflow. <br /> <br />A very significant factor in the Major Drainageway Planning <br />Study is, therefore, that elimination of Douglas Reservoir, <br /> <br />under consideration by the irrigation ditch company, would <br /> <br />increase discharges in Fort Collins by only 50% during a 100-year <br /> <br />event. This would probably have only minor effects on flood <br />damages. <br /> <br />.".... '::~t~_}';;:~" <br />:,.~~;>i1 :!t <br />