Laserfiche WebLink
<br />added and/or subtracted from the costs and benefits output from the Hazus <br />model. <br />3. Cost information for analysis: <br />a. Construction costs (quantitative) <br />b. Mitigation costs (quantitative) <br />c. Operation and maintenance costs (quantitative) <br />d. Social costs (qualitative) <br />4. Benefit information needed for analysis: <br />a. Flood damages/fighting (quantitative) <br />b. Development (quantitative) <br />c. Induced economic growth (quantitative) <br />d. Social (qualitative) <br />5. Analyze the following MN EIS alternatives (as described in the FSDD): <br />a. Proposed Project <br />b. Base No Action Alternative (no emergency measures) <br />c. C2 (move the Southern Alignment north 1.5 miles) <br />3. Other Studies and Support: <br />a. Compilation of completed and currently funded flood risk reduction projects <br />since FFREIS – Develop list of project descriptions and available information. <br />b. County and city land use plans (relevant portions) – Develop summary <br />information. <br />c. Analysis of hydrologic rating curve – Develop with updated H&H models that <br />incorporate the most recent project modifications and mitigation measures <br />(H&H 7.1 model update). <br />4. Deliverables <br />a. Model outputs for different flood frequencies for alternatives listed in VI.2.5. <br />b. For alternatives modeled, maps of the flood damages/fighting, development <br />and qualitative social outputs displayed geographically indicating North Dakota <br />versus Minnesota and metropolitan versus rural <br />c. Project descriptions and available information of completed and currently <br />funded flood risk reduction projects since FFREIS <br />d. Wetland impacts summary memo due to project changes <br />e. Summary of County and city land use plans <br />f. Updated H&H model <br /> <br />HMG_TO8-A6_Long.docx 6