FLOOD03928 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Table 7 ALTERNATIVE SELECTION MATRIX Note: Alternative No. I - No Action Not Ranked FACTOR 1 FACTOR 2 FACTOR 3 FACTOR 4 FACTOR 5 FACTOR 6 FACTOR 7 FACTOR 8 TOTALS Does the proje~t Does the project Does the projeet Does this alternative Rankingofproje~t Ranking of project Is there sufficient Miscellaneous provide immediate provide immediate provide immediate have Community with respect 10 ease of with respect to funding available to Impacts and f\ooO.~()nU"l)\ benef\t'5 llood ~ontTO\ benefits f1oodcomrolbenefilS support'> environmental estirnated cost (most complelelbe Unknown;. Alternative No. 'otheCi~'of tofannla'1dadjacent to the Town ofToWll permitting and costiy ranked iast). alternative? Tocai Points " Sterling? 10 Pawnee Creek? of Atwood? implementation, DESCRIPTION Alternaliverank Weightfaccor IS Weight factor 10 Weight factor 10 Weight FaclorIS Weight Faclor10 Weightfaclor IS Weight factor 15 Weight Faclor10 Yes, Pawnee Creek Yes. for area North of No, Potential for No. Potenrialfor Channelization of CostEst.SI,389,091. Yes. Possible greater Alternative No.2 overflowconcained. Pawnee Creek Bridge negative impact. grealerdamage downstream area may (Does no! include damage from floods TotalPointsz04IS and East of CR. 33 during floods greater require mitigation. CDOT bridge cost) inex~essoflOO-year PAWNEE thanlOO-yearin at Town of Alwood Altemative rank 2 .""'. Town of Atwood CREEK ""',. Rankl ""'k1 RankS Rank 6 """'1 LEVEES Points 60 "'''''. Points 10 Points9Q Points 10 Points IS Points SO Points 90 '0;0"'0 Yes, but localized Yes, but localized Yes, but localized No High cost makes it Each dam site will Cost Est. No. Possible need for Alternative No.3 flooding downstream flooding downstream flooding downstream essentially do nothing require an individual $27,365,885. improvements to Total Points =2S0 ofloweslreservoir oflowestreservoir of lowest reservoir alternative 404 Pennit. handle local Slonns UPSTREAM still possible. still possible. still possible. A\temati"'~rankS RESERVOIRS RankS RaokS ""''' Rank I R,~~l.: 2 g","\"l D~_\,. 1 I I 1 1 1 Rank 1 I"""'" I P:;;~~'lO Points 75 Points 50 PoinlSSO Points IS Points 20 Points 15 Points 15 Yes. No, No. Yes for Sterling but POlentialmiligationat CostEsl.$2,627,631. Yes. Subjeclloincreased Alternative No.4 does oot help Logan new northem channel flow due to future Total Points =370 County confluence with changes in railroad RIVERSIDE South Plane. height. Allemalive rank 4 r ... , ~EMETERY BERMSI CIlANNEL I RankS 1 Points SO I 1",""4 Points 60 I I""''' Points 90 I 1 1~~330 I Ram(Q Points 90 I 1 Rank 1 I Points 10 I Rank 1 I Points 10 I Rank 2 I PoinlS30 Alternative No.5 Yes. I Yes. , I .'( (' Yes,butfor minor floods only. Yes, but for minor I floods only. I Potential mitigation al Cost Est. S2,097,990. Yes. new !1nrthem eh'lnn..l I - - n_ --, ------.. I confluencewlth S .1. Dr tt Provides greatest I fle:dbHit)', Takes I advanlageofPawn.:-.:- ,.... kb'd " T_.~l n~:_._ _~~~ 'V""""""'-..J..J..J COMBINED N02 AND , , ou.....a.e. ,-ree ngecapacny t\lemalVeranKI I \ Rank 6 I ""'k' I RankS aIHWY6. N04 RaokS R<mkS RankS Rank 6 I Points 90 Points 50 Points 50 Points 90 I Points 50 Points 75 Rank 6 Points 60 I Points 90 Alternative No.6 Yes, but lOCal I Yes but local flooding Yes. No, local fanners I Pot:?tialmiti?~tionat CostEst,Sx,xxx,xxx, I y~, 1 Maycause I f1000!r1g may OlX"ur _t.:u"_ ,__~,___ I vUJ"~' 'v 1<UIU 'u~~, conlJuem;ewlln overtopping of South TolalPoints""'410 TOWN OF downstream of downstream of South Platte. Platte River and improvements. improvements. introduces drainage 10 Altemativer:mk3 ATWOOD areas not previous UPSTREAM subjecttoficcding. CHANNEL ""'kS RankS Rank 6 ""'kJ RankS Rank 2 Rank 6 Points7S PoinlsSO Points 60 Points 45 Points SO Points 30 Points 90 Rank 1 Points 10 1lI..16