FS0018X Feasibility study - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

] ., / Table 11. ALTERNATIVE SELECTION MATRIX Note: Alternative No. 1- No Action Not Ranked .:,_1 . ~ '81 . ~ . m'!H;~ ~~J!j8,;,m I'~it~~ Does the project Does the project Does the project Does this alternative Ranking. of project Ranking of project Is there sufficient Miscellaneous provide immediate provide immediate provide immediate have Community with respect to ease of with respect to funding available to Impacts and flood control benefits flood control benefits flood control benefits support? environmental estimated cost (most complete the Unknowns. Alternative No. to the City of to fannland adjacent to the Town of pennitting and costly ranked last). alternative? Total Points = Sterling? to Pawnee Creek? Atwood? implementation. DESCRIPTION Alternative rank Weight Factor 15 Weight Factor 10 Weight Factor 10 Weight Factor 15 Weight Factor 10 Weight Factor 15 Weight Factor 15 Weight Factor 10 Yes, Pawnee Creek Yes, for area North of No. Potential for No. Potential for Channelization of Cost Est $1,389,091. Yes. Possible greater Alternative No.2 overflow contained. Pawnee Creek Bridge negative impact. greater damage during downstream area may (Does not include damage from floods Total Points =415 and East of CR. 33 floods greater than require mitigation. CDOT bridge cost) in excess of 100-year 100-year in Town of .at Town of Atwood Alternative rank 2 PAWNEE Rank 6 Atwood CREEK Rank 6 Rank I Rank I Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank I LEVEES Points 60 Rank 6 Points 10 Pouits 90 Points 10 Points 15 Points 50 Points 90 Points 90 Yes, but localized Yes, but localized Yes, but 10caJized No High cost makes it Each dam site will Cost Est. No, Possible need for Alternative No.3 flooding downstream flooding downstream flooding downstream essentially do nothing require an individual $27,365,885. improvements to Total Points =250 of lowest reservoir of lowest reservoir oflowest reservoir alternative 404 Pe.nnit handle local stonns still possible. still possible. still possible. Alternative rank 5 UPSTREAM RESERVOIRS Rank 5 Rank 5 Rank 5 Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank I Rank 1 Rank I Points 10 Points 75 Points 50 Points 50 Points 15 Points 20 Points 15 Points 15 Yes. No. No. Yes for Sterling but Potential mitigation at Cost Est. $2,627,631. Yes. Subject to increased Alternative No.4 does not help Logan new northern channel flow due to future Total Points =370 County confluence with South changes in railroad Platte. height Alternative rank 4 RIVERSIDE CEMETERY Rank 6 Rank I Rank I Rank 2 Rank 5 Rank 4 Rank 6 BERMSI Points 90 Points 10 Points 10 Points 50 Points 60 Points 90 Rank 3 . CHANNEL Points 30 Points30 Alternative No.5 Yes. Yes, but for minor Yes, but for minor Yes. Potential mitigation at Cost Est. $2,097,990. Yes. Provides greatest floods only. floods only. new northern channel flexibility_ Takes Total Points =555 COMBINED confluence with South advantage of Pawnee Platte. Creek bridge capacity Alternative rank I NO 2 AND at HWY 6. N04 Rank 6 Rank 5 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 5 Rank 5 Rank 6 Points 90 Points 50 Points 50 Points 90 Points 50 Points 75 Rank 6 Points 60 Points 90 Alternative No.6 Yes, but local Yes but local flooding Yes. No, local farmers Potential mitigation at Cost Est. $x,xxx,xxx. Yes. May cause flooding may occur may occur object to land loss. confluence with South overtopping of South Total Points =410 TOWN OF downstream of downstream of Platte. Platte River and improvements. improvements. introduces drainage to Alternative rank 3 ATWOOD areas not previous UPSTREAM subject to flooding. CHANNEL Rank 5 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 3 Rank 5 Rank 2 Rank 6 Points 75 Points 50 Points 60 Points 45 Points 50 Points 30 Points 90 Rank I Points 10 j ..:1 i :-J '::-:,1 .d ~ ~_ I ~J n ,<1 ~:;;: ., -:..;_i "OJ '. j 30 J