My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD08495
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
FLOOD08495
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:14:44 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 3:41:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
Methodology for Evaluation of Feasibility: Multijurisdictional Urban Drainage and Flood Control Projects
Date
2/1/1977
Prepared By
UDFCD
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.
/
66
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />I I. PROJECT FEASIBILITY CONSIDERING ONLY DM1AGE REDUCTION AS AN <br />OBJECTIVE <br />The reader is referred to the work of James (4) and the recent <br />report of the UDFCD (2) for background reading in the economics of <br />flood control planning. In this document a step-by-step methodology <br />will be outlined but not derived because of limited space. <br />The basic steps in the evaluation procedure are as given below. <br />1. Decomposition of project into decision units (stream <br />reaches) <br />2, Development of damage~frequency information <br />3. Formulation of basic alternatives for each decision <br />unit <br />4. Screening to identify most promising alternatives <br />in each decision unit <br />5. Study of variation of costs and benefits with de?ign <br />frequency for alternatives within each decision unit <br />6. Display of evaluation information in format for decision <br />makers <br />7. Tradeoff analysis considering other benfits and costs <br />8. Selection of recommended plan <br />These steps are described in more detail below, <br />1, Project Decomposition. The best overall plan can only be <br />determined if the best plan for each of the parts is known. Unless <br />the plan is divided into stream reaches (decision units), it is possible <br />for 1ess-than-optimum features to pass by on the merits of others. <br />Too much decomposition will bury the analyst in detail. It is <br />suggested that decomposition by subcatchment, by reach and by juris- <br />diction be considered. The subcatchments selected should be principal <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.