FS0018X Feasibility study

• Contract/PO #: FS0018X
• Contractor Name: Sterling, City of
• Contract Type: Loan
• Water District: 0
• County: Logan
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

receive a total of 600 points (100 weight factors times a rank of 6). The factors used to establish the
project prioritization list and their relative weights are discussed below:

'f~<:;TQR:~i~
I 1. I Does the project provide immediate flood control benefits to the City of Sterling? A weight of
. 15 out of 100 is assigned to this factor. This is an important factor in that the majority of the
impacted population resides in Sterling. An estimated 414 homes sustained flood damage as a
result of the 1997 storm.

Weight
15

2.

Weight
10

3.

Weight
10
4.

Weight
15
5.

Weight
10
6.

Weight
15
7.

Weight
15
8.

Weight
10

Table 10. Alternative Evaluation Factors

Does the project provide immediate flood control benefits to farmland adjacent to Pawnee
Creek? A weight of 10 out of 100 is assigned to this factor since it was estimated that as much
as 13,000 acres of crop land were damaged from the 1997 storm with crop damage and damage
to farming property of $2.5 million.

Does the project provide immediate flood control benefits to the Town of Atwood? This
consideration draws a weight of 10 01,1t of 100 since such a significant portion of the town was
inundated during the 1997 storm.

Does this alternative have c,ommunity support? A weight of 15 out of 100 is assigned to this
faCtor.

Ranking of project with respect to ease of environmental permitting/implementation. This factor
is weighted 10 out of 100. No points given in the event that regulatory requirements would
likely not be obtained. Points assigned based on relative cost of mitigation.

Ranking of project with respect to estimated costs versus benefits. A weight of 15 out of 100 is
given to this factor.

Is there sufficient funding available to complete the project? This factor is weighted relatively
high (I5 out of 100) because of grant requirements that the project must be affordable and
implemented as a stand alone project.

Miscellaneous Impacts and Unknowns. A weight of 15 out of 100 is assigned to this factor.
The project benefits are considered separately.

The following table presents a matrix which was prepared in order to evaluate the alternatives. The
matrix includes a brief statement related to each of the factors discussed above for the entire alternative
and key and components. The matrix was presented to the Colorado Water Conservation District, City
of Sterling and Logan County for initial ranking. Results of this ranking were then presented at a
public forum on January 16, 1997. Input from the public at large was received an added to the tables
for the final ranking.

29