FLOOD04787 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Both stabilize and reduce flood damage enter into the regression equation positively . and their values are also listed in Table ill. Stabilize has a value of $4,488 per property and reduce flood damage contributes $7,804 or five percent of property value. Individually, it appears as though stabilizing stream banks does not add as much to property value as does reducing flood damage and the measures in Package A. The values reflect buyers' perceptions at the time of purchase; perhaps education trails and less damaged banks are more visually important to home buyers than the technical details of bank: stabilization. Reducing flood damage is highly correlated with other stream measures such as stabilizing stream banks, clearing obstructions and revegetating the riparian area. The value obtained for reduced flood damage, therefore, cannot be entirely attributed to that individual measure. It is important to remember that the values for each measure do not take into account the costs of performing that measure. The benefit differential among measures may be offset by a differential in the costs of restoration. In other words, deciding to acquire land solely because it produces the greatest gross benefit is not an adequate reason. The higher cost of acquiring land may far outweigh the benefits of the measures, thus reducing the net benefit (benefit-cost) of the measure. Maximizing net benefits, therefore, would be a better objective in deciding which restoration measures;to carry out in a project. The benefits must be weighed against the costs. For instance, the following hypOthetical example illustrates the proper analysis. The benefit of acquiring land has been determined to be $19,123 per property. The benefit of stabilizing stream banks is $4,488. If costs of acquiring land, however, are 15 . .