My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD04787
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
FLOOD04787
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:47:15 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 12:59:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
Colorado Association of Storm Water and Floodplain Managers 8th annual Conference
Date
9/22/1997
Prepared For
State of Colorado
Prepared By
CASFM
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.
/
181
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 />single family residence. These values are specific to our sample of projects, which reflects . <br /> <br /> <br />the San Francisco Bay area and Santa Cruz. It may not be appropriate to generalize these <br /> <br /> <br />values to other geographic areas. However the basic method would be applicable. <br /> <br /> <br />To alleviate the problem of multicollinearity among project measures, it would be <br /> <br /> <br />useful to have information on the amount of restoration done, such as the number of linear <br /> <br /> <br />feet. Three measures of this type--linear feet of fish habitat maintained, education trail <br /> <br /> <br />established, and flood damage reduced--produced changes in property prices from $1,000 to <br /> <br /> <br />$17,560, depending on the number of linear feet restored. It is important for analysis to have <br /> <br /> <br />all projects report the amount of restoration completed for valid calculation of values, <br /> <br /> <br />Another recommendation for alleviating the correlation among stream variables is to <br /> <br /> <br />define measures more specifically, If one objective can be accomplished by performing <br /> <br /> <br />another, then the objective is too broadly defined and increases the difficulty of computing a . <br /> <br /> <br />separate value for each measure. <br /> <br />The benefit of these increases in property values also benefits communities as a whole, <br /> <br />In California, using the Proposition 13 tax rate of 1.25% of property value, an increase in <br /> <br /> <br />property value of $19,078 would provide about $240 per house in additional property tax to <br /> <br /> <br />the community annually. When added up over the large number of single family homes in <br /> <br /> <br />the funded areas, the present value of the added tax money over the life of the restoration <br /> <br /> <br />project is likely to contribute far more revenue than the program costs (which in our study has <br /> <br />a median value of $34,920). <br /> <br /> <br />Based on our research, the basic hedonic property approach appears to be useful for <br /> <br /> <br />evaluating the benefits of a wide variety of urban stream restoration programs. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.