Laserfiche WebLink
<br />54 <br /> <br />established. Caution must be exercised since determination of these <br /> <br />points will affect :he computati-Jn of the average ann<Jal flooc dal11age. <br /> <br />In this example, flood damages are hicJh for' the "Baseline" condition <br /> <br />even though an effective flood plain regulation has been assumed. The <br /> <br />damages are largely due to existi~~ develo~nent within the flood plain, <br /> <br />including a portion of completely Lrbanized area. <br /> <br />The damages for the Reach shown on Table A-5 amount to more than <br /> <br />half the total Little Dry Creek damages shown on Figure A-3. The high <br /> <br />ratio is due to the comparably extensive development in Reach 101-103. <br /> <br />Step 9 - Compute the average anrl~3J_fLood__d_ilIl1aJI~_JJQt_e_rlti,il_Li()T_eacr'- <br />a lternat i ve ~--~~- <br /> <br />Repeat the flood damage compJtat'ion parts of Step 8 for each flood <br /> <br />control alternative under consideration. Ther'e will gener'ally be <br /> <br />residual flood damages for each alternative, due to flood events larger <br /> <br />than the design event. The residual damage is the area under the <br /> <br />damage-frequency curve after the alternative's implemented. Figure A-4 <br /> <br />shows such a curve for one alternative, p'lotted alongside the Baseline <br /> <br />curve. <br /> <br />The reduction in the annual flood damage potential is the principal <br /> <br />benefit realized if the flood control improvement is constructed. The <br /> <br />average annual benefit is illustrated graphically in Figure A-4 as the <br /> <br />area between the two curves. <br /> <br />Step 1 0 ~omput~J:c~~C9-,s.!,,-.fO!:J:h-,,~Lt~_nat i v_e.s <br />Prepare a table that reflects end-of-the-year costs over the <br /> <br />project life. The table would resemble Table A-6, prepared for one <br /> <br />alternative. <br />