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 />57 <br /> <br />Step, 11 - I-'i scount [3enefits and Costs ,~,pyrop,'iately <br /> <br /> <br />Selection 01 an al'Ptopl'iate discount \'ate is il[101'tilnt. The dis- <br /> <br /> <br />count I-ate wi 11 biels the analysis and Inay ch,lncle the l-eCOllunended alter- <br /> <br /> <br />native, Selection should reflect at least the cost of borrowed <br /> <br /> <br />capital for the entities involved. In this exalni'll', the l'l'collilnended <br /> <br /> <br />value of the ,,'ater Resources Council uf 5-7/8 per vcar fOl- fiscal yeal' <br /> <br /> <br />1975 vias used. Appendix G provides additional infomation on the selection. <br /> <br /> <br />The selection of time horizon 01' planninq period should be bilsed <br /> <br /> <br />upon the physical' ife of the illl[ll'OVell1ents vlIlich vlill prevent or contl-ol <br /> <br /> <br />flooding, If the il1pniVements h"ve a uselu] ] He \'Iili, h is less than the <br /> <br /> <br />design recun-ence interval of the level of p,-otection and the analyst <br /> <br /> <br />vlishes to extend the ileA to that point, IL is necessary to Sil0\'1 replace- <br /> <br /> <br />ment of the facilities as a pmject cost. Hirlh inflation 1l1akes this <br /> <br /> <br />procedure uncertain, For this example il 50-year project life was chosen, <br /> <br /> <br />Tilis corresponds to Corps procedures, <br /> <br /> <br />Comparison of benefits and costs IllUSt be made for the same time <br /> <br /> <br />frame, Benefits s temmi ng from reduced fl ood damages occurri no annually <br /> <br /> <br />over the life of the project cannot be compared directly with construction <br /> <br /> <br />costs which occur over il short period of tillle at the beginnino of the <br /> <br /> <br />project. All benefits ilnd costs must be converted to eitiler present or <br /> <br /> <br />annual amounts before comparison, using appropriate interE'st factors, <br /> <br /> <br />which account for the time value of money, <br /> <br /> <br />Step ,1 ,2- _Di,spl,<lY _lJ_e!1.E'0t-<:os_tini2-l^Inati on <br />Display of alternatives is pOSSible vlith a number of methods, <br />including the beneFit-cost riltio, net benefit, incremental rate-of- <br />return and minimization of total costs. For simplIcity, the net <br />benefit method is highlighted in this document. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.