Laserfiche WebLink
<br />H <br /> <br />X-4 <br /> <br />INTANG1BLE BENEFITS <br />Natural resource planning organi~at;ons in recent years have begun to recog- <br />nize the importance Of the intangible components of resource utilization. <br />Almost by definition, intangiblabenefits ".ereconsidered to be immeasur- <br />able. Intangible benefits are included in this study in the form of a <br />qualitativeandly,isonly, and should be reviewed and evaluated by the com- <br />munityleaders along with the primary and secoMarybenefits of each alter- <br />native plan. <br /> <br />o Public hea.lth and welfare <br /> <br />o ~ultiple use opportunities <br /> <br />o Floodplain and stream impacts <br /> <br />o Environmentalcon,iderations <br /> <br />o General ease of implementation <br /> <br />lntimgible benefits include those components of environmental appreciation <br />which dfe not d irectly qua~tifiable i~ terms Of doll ar value or doll ars <br />spent tor their usage. Normally, i~ta~gibles accrue from the aesthetic, <br />.scientific, educatioMl, historical, a~d recreational aspects of natural a~d <br />man-made environments. One additional intang1b\ebenefit. peculiar to re- <br />sidents of flood hazard areas, is the peace of mind which can be enjoyed by <br />those safe-guarded from future flood d~ages. <br /> <br />o Publicacceptabi11ty <br /> <br />o future goals and objectives <br /> <br />The inclusion of intangible benefits in the land usedecision-m akingprocess <br />presents obvious advantages. The methOds by~hich they ca~ be included, <br />however, are not so apparent. Benefit/ cost an a lyses have been u~ed to wpi gh <br />the merits ot vanous alternatlve courses or action in term, oJ e(.QfI()Ilrk <br />efficiency. Intangible benefits and costs are appropriately included in tne <br />oecision-making process as effects t~ be considered in addition to the bene- <br />fit/costanaIysis. <br /> <br />ALTERNAT1VE EVALUAT10N <br />To assist the decision makers in selecti~g the alternative plan for Reach 1 <br />which would most berlefittne surrounding CityofGoOldencofOOlunities, dmd- <br />trix of CQments for each of the alternatives has been prepared and is <br />preser,ted in lable X-I. lhe impacts on each an~d of concern nave been <br />evaluateQover tne life of the community, "ith an elTIphasls on the expected <br />dverageyedr-roundeffect'Son the Clear Creek corridor. The annual costs <br />listed are based on d lOO-year design frequency for ReaCh 1 (see Section <br />IX). <br /> <br />Intangibles whiCh should be considered in the €yaluation of each alternative <br />plan in light of their impacts on the City of Golden are: <br /> <br />o Impactonneighborhood <br /> <br />o Enhancement of recreation <br /> <br />o water qua~ity impacts <br />