Laserfiche WebLink
Hier 1 T e <br />To conclude, ~ adequate attention isn't <br />given to downstream land use, flood damage <br />reduction benefits of a flood control dam will be <br />negated because of emergency spillway <br />discharge potential, and the possibility of <br />disaster would still exist ev6n though the dam <br />would operate as designed. <br />References: <br />Cooper, Jlm, On Guard Against Failure, <br />The Minnesota Volunteer, January/February <br />1984, p. 2. <br />Minnesota DNR, Division of Waters and <br />i <br />s r I r <br />Iii <br />y Bob Bezek, Rochester <br />r yrolo ist <br />The Winter 1988 issue of Water Talk included <br />an article outlining the framework of the <br />Rochester flood control project. At that time <br />construction had just begun with a projected <br />cost of S90 million. Seven years later, with a <br />price tag approaching S 111 million, the project is <br />just about <br />completed with the <br />final phase <br />expected to be <br />done later this year. <br />What will <br />completion of the <br />project mean to the <br />citizens of <br />Rochester? For <br />some Ft will be the <br />economic benefit <br />of not having to <br />pay for flood <br />insurance. To the <br />City fathers N will be <br />Un versrty of Minnesota, Soli Science <br />Department, Sixteen Year Studv of <br />Minnesota Flash Fib, January 1988. <br />Minnesota Department of Natural <br />Resources, Division of Waters, <br />Should Know Abort Buving. Owning or <br />Building a House in a Floodolain, 1994. <br />Minnesota DNR, Division of Waters <br />and Federal Emergency Management <br />Agency, Dam Safety Guide Book. <br />Minnesota Edition, not dated. <br />U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil <br />Conservation Service, Getting the Most <br />Out of Your Raindro~Hydroloay yid <br />for Minnesota, October 1992. <br />the satisfaction of completing a major project <br />for the betterment of the community. The <br />environmentalist will consider it the end to a song <br />battle. For most it will be one less construction <br />project in town to contend with. <br />fie project was a structural solution to <br />flooding problems that have plagued Rochester <br />since it was founded in 1854. it was o cooper- <br />ative effort between the Corps of Engineers <br />(COE), the Natural Resources Conservation <br />Services (MRCS, formerly the SCS), and the City <br />of Rochester. The basic premise of the project <br />was o combination <br />of 7 flood retention <br />reservoirs; about 2 <br />miles of levee, and <br />9 miles of channel <br />modifications. <br />The project <br />provides Rochester <br />with flood protec- <br />tion up to the limits <br />of a 16Qyeor <br />event. This is <br />roughly equivalent <br />to the flood of <br />record which <br />u. ~~.o ~~w~~~,y ~, Kvcnvsror r®wn®a u~ 59 rruiuon douars to damap®s <br />and th® d®ath ~ S individuals. ...PlQase tum to page 4 <br /> <br />