Laserfiche WebLink
<br />LIST OF FIGURES cont. <br /> <br />Figure <br /> <br />Page <br /> <br />7.6(a) Results of sensitivity studies within Test I.A. <br /> <br />95 <br /> <br />7.6(b) Results of sensitivity studies within Test LC. <br /> <br /> <br />7.6(c) Results of sensitivity studies within Test VID. <br /> <br /> <br />7.6(d) Results of sensitivity studies within Test No8. <br /> <br />96 <br /> <br />96 <br /> <br />96 <br /> <br />8.1 illustration of a typical social utility profiles for alternative storm drain- <br />age schemes within an urbanized area . . . . . . . . . . . . . III <br /> <br />8.2 A conception of model utility. A variety of groups can be included and <br />a choice of proposals compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 <br /> <br /> LIST OF TABLES <br />Table Page <br />2.1 Variables found important in one or more regression equations and <br /> their theoretical ranges as measured in the First Phase of the study for <br /> identifying siguificant variables 10 <br />2.2 Physical characterislics for the urbanizing portion of Mill Creek, Big <br /> Cottonwood Creek, and little Cottonwood Creek Drainages 19 <br />2.3 Characteristics of the main drainage channels of Mill, Big Cottonwood, <br /> and little Cottonwood Creeks within the urbanizing portions of the <br /> study area 21 <br />3.1 Optimized parameter values for the upper and lower subwatersheds of <br /> Mill Creek 31 <br />3.2 Parameter values used in the hourly time increment model of the rural <br /> portions of the study area . 32 <br />3.3 Precipitation and associated computed runoff rates corresponding to <br /> rainfall events or specific frequencies within the urban portion of the <br /> study area 40 <br />4.1 Components of a decision in flood control action shown by Figure 4.3 47 <br />4.2 Significant variables for attitudes toward flood actions 49 <br />5.1 Variables in Equation I: public concern 63 <br />5.2 Variables for agency equation 65 <br />5.3 Terms of agency equations 66 <br /> <br />xl <br />