FLOOD01117

• Designation Number: 219
• County: Arapahoe
• Community: Littleton
• Stream Name: Upper Slaughterhouse Gulch
• Title: Major Drainageway Planning - Upper Slaughterhouse Gulch
• Date: 3/1/1983
• Designation Date: 7/1/1983
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Floodplain Report/Masterplan

I

I

I
I

E. Improvement Costs

I

The cost of each improvement is divided into six categories: Drainage Improve-

ments (DRAIN. IMP.), Utility Relocation (UTIL. RELOC.), Contingency (CONT.), Site

Acquisition (SITE ACQ.), Engineering and Construction Services (ENGR.), and annual

Operations and Maintenance (OPER. AND MAINT.). The unit prices used in the cost

analysis are presented in Table V-I. Since none of the improvements are considered

culverts, then none of the improvement costs are allocated to a street improvement

category.

I

I

I

Drainage Improvements costs are the cost associated with improving the existing

drainageway such that the design flows are handled according to the established

criteria. Utility Relocation costs are the costs of relocating or protecting the

telephone, electric, gas, water and sewer utilities to make room for the proposed

drainageway improvements. A 20% contingency value was applied to the sum of the

Drainage Improvements and Utility Relocation costs. Included in the Contingency

Cost is the Legal and Administrative Cost which was valued at 5% of the Drainage

Improvements and Utility Relocation costs.

I

I

I

Site Acquisition costs are the expenditures required to purchase land to

construct and maintain the Drainageway Improvements, and are a function of the poten-

tial land use or zoning. Engineering and Construction Services costs are the

expenditures required for design and supervision during construction. A 15% value

was applied to the sum of the Drainage Improvements, Utility Relocation, and Con-

tingency costs to determine the Engineering and Construction Services costs.

I

I

I

The annual Operations and Maintenance for the drainageway improvement were

discussed in Section V-D, "Operations and Maintenance". The costs associated with

the Operations and Maintenance are also presented in Table V-I.

I

I

The cost breakdown for each of the reaches is presented in Table IV-2. The

values are in thousands of dollars as shown on Table V-2. The overall benefit-cost

ratio for the selected alternative is 2:1. The recommended alternative must be

totally implemented before the total benefits shown will be realized. Although

the City of Littleton derives most of the benefits from implementing the recommended

improvements, the majority of the watershed is in unincorporated Arapahoe County.

I

I

I

-37-