appendix d - project prioritization ranking worksheets d - project prioritization ranking worksheets...

Download Appendix D - Project Prioritization Ranking Worksheets D - Project Prioritization Ranking Worksheets . Prepared By: JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Date: Project ID: ... This prioritization

Post on 05-May-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents

2 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Antelope Creek Watershed Basin Management Plan

    Appendix D - Project Prioritization Ranking Worksheets

  • Prepared By: JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Date:

    Project ID: P01 Watershed Antelope Creek

    Project Location: Antelope Park: Van Dorn St to Sheridan BlvdProject Description: Channel and Wetland Enhancements

    Issues

    Addressed:

    Flooding Impacts

    Flooding Benefits Points, PFDMajor Structural Flooding Damage 30Structural Flooding Damage 20Non-Structural Flooding Streets / ROW, Other 15Conservation / Prevention Easements / Acquisitions 10None 0

    PFD= 0

    Flooding Frequency Multiplier, CFFFrequent Flooding More frequent than 10-year storm 4Infrequent Flooding Less frequent than 10-year storm 2None 0 0

    CFF= 0 0A = PFD * CFF 0

    Stream Stability

    Stream Stability Benefit Points, PETChannel Erosion Threatening to Structures 50Channel Erosion Threatening to Public Infrastructure 40Channel Erosion Threatening to Natural Resources 35Conservation / Prevention 10Secondary Stream Stability benefit due to Flood Control or Water Quality Project 10None 0

    PET= 10

    Erosion Activity / Systemic Threat Multiplier, CEAAggressive Channel Erosion 3Non-Aggressive Channel Erosion 2None 0 10

    CEA= 2 2B = PET * CEA 20

    Water Quality

    Water Quality Benefits Points, PWQEnhance / Preserve Natural Resource Areas (Lake, Wetlands, etc.) 60Regulatory Compliance / Stormwater Permit / NPDES 60Create New Natural Resource Areas (Lakes, Wetlands, etc.) 50Conservation / Prevention 30Secondary Water Quality benefit due to Flood Control or Stream Stability Project 20None 0

    PWQ= 30

    Project Benefit Multiplier, CWBMajor Water Quality Benefit Broad-Based Impacts 4Water Quality Benefit Localized Impacts 3None 0 30

    CWB= 3 3C = PWQ * CWB 90

    Safety Factor

    Public Health and Safety Points, PSFHigh Risk Potential Loss of Life or Bodily Injury 160Low Risk Public Nuisance 60No Risk 0

    PSF= 0 D = PSF 0

    Prioritization Ranking SummaryX = A + B + C + D 110

    Miscellaneous Factors may be used to adjust scoring:PMISC (See attached worksheet for description of miscellaneous items) 30May Include: Project Location, Coincident Projects, Development Status, etc.PAC, Additional Considerations (may be used to add or subtract up to 60 points) 60May Include: Legal Issues, Jurisdictional Coordination, Complaints, Outside Funding Sources, Wildlife Benefits, etc.

    TOTAL = X + PMISC + PAC 200

    TOTAL for PROJECT AC-P01 200

    Comments or Description of Additional Considerations:

    Additional Consideration given as project helps address TMDL requirements and provides direct public education benefits

    Note: This prioritization methodology is not intended for Urban Drainage Improvement projects.

    Prioritization Ranking for Watershed Master Plan ProjectsCity of Lincoln, Nebraska

    1/10/12

    Structural and N

    on-Structural Flooding

    Projects primarily intended to address structural or non-structural flooding will usually incorporate a high or low risk safety factor and may, if applicable, incorporate stream stability or water quality benefits.

    Open C

    hannel and Surface E

    rosion

    Projects primarily intended for stream stability typically will not incorporate flooding impact benefits; though may incorporate water quality benefits.

    Water Q

    uality, Wetlands, N

    atural Habitat

    Projects primarily intended for water quality typically will not incorporate flooding impact benefits; though may incorporate stream stability benefits.

    Public H

    ealth and S

    afety

    Project Location, D

    evelopment S

    tatus, Coincident P

    rojects, Condition /

    Maintenance, D

    ownstream

    Impacts, S

    ource Reduction, A

    dditional C

    onsiderations

  • MISCELLANEOUS FACTORSP01 Points

    AvailablePoints

    AssignedLocation Public Property or willing owner of Private Property up to 20 20

    Coincident with Adjacent Projects Public Projects (water, sanitary, roads, etc.) up to 20Private Projects up to 10

    Development Status Tier I, Priority A 20(Points available are fixed, and are not flexible) Tier I, Priority B 15

    Tier I, Priority C 10Existing City Limits 10 10Tier II (development 25 - 50 years) 5Tier III (development > 50 years) 0

    Total Miscellaneous Points, P MISC = 30

    Tier I, Priority C - This is the later phase of development areas and is intended to be served after Priority A and B. Givencurrent growth rates and infrastructure financing, development would not begin in this area until after 2020 or 2025.

    Tier I, Priority A - Areas designated for near term development are generally contiguous to existing development andshould be provided first with basic infrastructure within six years of the adoption of the Plan. Some of the infrastructurerequired for development may already be in place. This area includes some land already annexed, with City commitments tofund infrastructure improvements, but the land is still undeveloped and without significant infrastructure in place yet. Someinfrastructure improvements may be done in the near term while others, such as road improvements that are generally morecostly, may take longer to complete.

    Tier I, Priority B - The next areas for development, beyond Priority A, are those which currently lack almost all of theinfrastructure required to support development. In areas with this designation, the community will maintain present uses untilurban development can commence. Infrastructure improvements to serve this area will not initially be included in the CitysCIP, but will be actively planned for in the longer term capital improvement planning of the various city and countydepartments.

  • Prepared By: JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Date:

    Project ID: P02 Watershed Antelope Creek

    Project Location: Antelope Park: South St to Van Dorn StProject Description: Channel Enhancements

    Issues

    Addressed:

    Flooding Impacts

    Flooding Benefits Points, PFDMajor Structural Flooding Damage 30Structural Flooding Damage 20Non-Structural Flooding Streets / ROW, Other 15Conservation / Prevention Easements / Acquisitions 10None 0

    PFD= 10

    Flooding Frequency Multiplier, CFFFrequent Flooding More frequent than 10-year storm 4Infrequent Flooding Less frequent than 10-year storm 2None 0 10

    CFF= 2 2A = PFD * CFF 20

    Stream Stability

    Stream Stability Benefit Points, PETChannel Erosion Threatening to Structures 50Channel Erosion Threatening to Public Infrastructure 40Channel Erosion Threatening to Natural Resources 35Conservation / Prevention 10Secondary Stream Stability benefit due to Flood Control or Water Quality Project 10None 0

    PET= 35

    Erosion Activity / Systemic Threat Multiplier, CEAAggressive Channel Erosion 3Non-Aggressive Channel Erosion 2None 0 35

    CEA= 2 2B = PET * CEA 70

    Water Quality

    Water Quality Benefits Points, PWQEnhance / Preserve Natural Resource Areas (Lake, Wetlands, etc.) 60Regulatory Compliance / Stormwater Permit / NPDES 60Create New Natural Resource Areas (Lakes, Wetlands, etc.) 50Conservation / Prevention 30Secondary Water Quality benefit due to Flood Control or Stream Stability Project 20None 0

    PWQ= 20

    Project Benefit Multiplier, CWBMajor Water Quality Benefit Broad-Based Impacts 4Water Quality Benefit Localized Impacts 3None 0 20

    CWB= 3 3C = PWQ * CWB 60

    Safety Factor

    Public Health and Safety Points, PSFHigh Risk Potential Loss of Life or Bodily Injury 160Low Risk Public Nuisance 60No Risk 0

    PSF= 0 D = PSF 0

    Prioritization Ranking SummaryX = A + B + C + D 150

    Miscellaneous Factors may be used to adjust scoring:PMISC (See attached worksheet for description of miscellaneous items) 30May Include: Project Location, Coincident Projects, Development Status, etc.PAC, Additional Considerations (may be used to add or subtract up to 60 points) 60May Include: Legal Issues, Jurisdictional Coordination, Complaints, Outside Funding Sources, Wildlife Benefits, etc.

    TOTAL = X + PMISC + PAC 240

    TOTAL for PROJECT AC-P02 240

    Comments or Description of Additional Considerations:

    Additional Consideration given as project helps address TMDL requirements and provides direct public education benefits

    Note: This prioritization methodology is not intended for Urban Drainage Improvement projects.

    Prioritization Ranking for Watershed Master Plan ProjectsCity of Lincoln, Nebraska

    1/10/12

    Structural and N

    on-Structural Flooding

    Projects primarily intended to address structural or non-structural flooding will usually incorporate a high or low risk safety factor and may, if applicable, incorporate stream stability or water quality benefits.

    Open C

    hannel and Surface E

    rosion

    Projects primarily intended for stream stability typically will not incorporate flooding impact benefits; though may incorporate water quality benefits.

    Water Q

    uality, Wetlands, N

    atural Habitat

    Projects primarily intended for water quality typically will not incorporate flooding impact benefits; though may incorporate stream stability benefits.

    Public H

    ealth and S

    afety

    Project Location, D

    evelopment S

    tatus, Coincident P

    rojects, Condition /

    Maintenance, D

    ownstream

    Impacts, S

    ource Reduction, A

    dditional C

    onsiderations

  • MISCELLANEOUS FACTORSP02 Points

    AvailablePoints

    AssignedLocation Public Property or willing owner of Private Property up to 20 20

    Coincident with Adjacent Projects Public Projects (water, sanitary, roads, etc.) up to 20Private Projects up to 10

    Development

Recommended

View more >