My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD02020
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
FLOOD02020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 12:57:59 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 10:32:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
State of Colorado
Stream Name
All
Title
Feasibility Evaluation Multijurisdictional Urban Drainage Projects
Date
2/1/1977
Prepared For
UDFCD
Prepared By
Multiple Authors
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />29 <br /> <br />III, CONSIDERATION OF OTHER BENE"ITS <br />As part of the investigation leading to the report cited in (2), <br />the writers investigated the literature on the evaluation of social <br />and environmental benefits and costs of water resources projects, <br />Literally hundreds of reports are now available on this subject, <br />Emerging and often frustrating reqGirements for environmental and <br />social impact statements represent the state-of-the-art of assess- <br />ments of this type, <br /> <br />These techniques are in a state of infancy compared to the economic <br /> <br />analysis presented previously, Accordingly, no specific, step-by-step <br />guidelines can be recommended as part of this methodology, The reader <br />is referred to (2) as a starting point for studying the literature on <br />this subject, <br />Therefore, the analyst must find a way to present to the decision <br />makers the pertinent information concerning non-damage costs and <br />benefits in order that this information can be considered at the same <br />time as the damage reduction information, <br />The method suggested in this document follows the general pro- <br />cedure of the U, S, Water Resources Council (6) which extensively <br />studied the problem of evaluating project feasibility, <br />The reader should obtain a copy of the Principles and Standards <br />(6) if he desires an in-depth understanding of the evaluation tech- <br />niques involved, For this methodology, an abbreviated version is <br />presented to demonstrate its application to UOFC, <br />Briefly, the method consists of listing in the form of a matrix <br />beneficial and adverse effects of each project receiving consideration, <br />This technique is illustrated in the example to follow, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.