Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002258 <br /> <br />below ground and extended 5.5 feet (1.7 ml above ground surface, of which <br />2.0 feet (0.6 m) is freeboard. A total of 51,200 linear feet (15605.8 m) <br />of wall would be required. The cost of flood proofing is $4,553,880. <br />This alternative is not considered feasible. <br /> <br />The alternative of taking no-project-action would leave everything as it <br />is now. Such an alternative discounts the hazard of 'human life with its <br />traumatic experiences and ignores the value of property demands caused by <br />flooding since the time of settlement. <br /> <br />Economic Evaluation, Benefits & Effects <br /> <br />Development in Erie has occurred without proper resource planning. <br />8uilding in the floodplain increases the initial cost of private and <br />pUblic developments, increases operation and maintenance costs of <br />developments and increases pollution problems which degrades the <br />environment. These problems have a long term effect which burdens the <br />taxpayer with eyer increasing expenditures. <br /> <br />Significant damages occur to the following: residences, lawns, driveways, <br />businesses, roads, railroad and pUblic development. Damages occur when <br />larger and more infrequent storms produce runoff that exceeds the capacity <br />of the present waterway. <br /> <br />The collection and safe disposal of floodwaters (100 years protection) <br />through the town of Erie will virtually eliminate the damages in Erie from <br />upstream runoff. Only minor damage to individual properties from local <br />runoff will still exist. Estimated average annual damage reduction <br />benefits including indirect and redevelopment benefits is $33,500. The <br />estimated average annual cost (including 0 & M) is $29,000 for the least <br />costly alternative. All other alternatives were not economically <br />feasible. <br /> <br />, <br />" <br /> <br />" <br />II <br />~ <br />'j <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The indirect benefits attributed to runoff control would include a <br />reduction in a loss of income to businesses and inhabitants during and <br />following a flood. Additionally, redevelopment benefits from jOb <br />opportunities during construction may exist and were used in analyzing <br />project feasibility. Finally, installation would improve the economic <br />climate of the area and provide a stimulus for improving better resource <br />planning, development and beautification of homes and grounds in the <br />area. <br /> <br />Recommendations <br /> <br />Alternative four meets the criteria for a PL-566 flood control project. <br />This alte~native will provide protection to the town of Erie, but it will <br />not allevlate any of the flood damage occurring other parts of the water- <br />shed. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />It may also have adverse environmental effects on the stream channel. <br /> <br />4 <br />