Laserfiche WebLink
<br />) <br /> <br />frequently flooded areas, will not be perpetuated. The rationality test <br /> <br />for continued floodplain occupancy is whether the floodplain location <br /> <br />offers advantages sufficient to offset the costs of any land use or <br /> <br />building regulations, plus the costs of any residual flood damages. <br /> <br />4) Development conditions are never static. Property can be added <br /> <br />to or removed from the floodplain. Frequently flooded property may be <br /> <br />abandoned and removed over a period of years. <br /> <br />5) Other Federal projects that are authorized and not yet <br /> <br />constructed, and non-Federal flood control projects that are planned and <br /> <br />not yet constructed by state and local governments, should be evaluated <br /> <br />according to the likelihood and projected date of their implementation. <br /> <br />6) If local action is planned to occur only as the result of no <br /> <br />Federal action, the project should not be assumed as part of the "without" <br /> <br />) <br />--" <br /> <br />condition. Local interests should not be penalizeE for their own <br /> <br />incentive. <br /> <br />Listed below are five basic steps in calculating inundation reduction <br /> <br />benefits for future conditions without-project: <br /> <br />STEP ONE: ESTABLISH THE ECONOKIC AND DEKOGRAPHIC BASE <br /> <br />The analysis of future benefits without-project begins with a <br /> <br />detailed study of population characteristics and the level of economic <br /> <br />activity in the region. Projections for population and economic activity <br /> <br />are made for several points into the future. Values for the intervening <br /> <br />years would then be interpolated, with the values displayed for the 10th, <br /> <br />20th, 30th, 40th, and 50th year beyond the base year. <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />VI-3 <br />